Rajwant Kaur¹* and Pawan Kumar²

¹Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Patiala, Punjab, India
²Department of Orthopaedics, AP Trauma Centre and hospital, Patiala, Punjab, India

*Corresponding Author: Rajwant Kaur, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Patiala, Punjab, India.

Received: November 25, 2021; Published: January 28, 2022

Abstract

Introduction: Tracheostomy changes the lives of the patients as well as of their relative. As care of the patients, their tube, and is full of challenges. Aim of study to highlight challenges and recommendations were suggested to improve the same.

Material and Methods: 108 subjects were enrolled in the study. 67 participant were assessed after 2 ½ month for quality of life using SF 36 questionnaire on follow up visit or using online web method by what Sapp and telephonically conversation using online link (https://orthotoolkit.com/sf-36/). After analysis of the result recommendations were suggested to improve quality care of these patients.

Result: Among the 108 patients only 67 were included after their consent in the study. 31 patients were decannulated successfully whereas rest 36 were still tracheotomised. The SF-36 questionnaire consists of 36 items measuring eight multi-item domains in a 0–100 scale, a higher score representing a better condition: physical (PF) and social functioning (SF), role limitations due to physical (RP) or emotional problems (RE), mental health (MH), vitality (VT), bodily pain (BP) and general health (GH). The reliability and validity of the SF-36 has been evaluated in the critically ill population. It was found that tracheostomized patient’s quality of life was badly affected in all the eight multi-item domains. So after analysis recommendations were suggested to improve quality care of these patients which is often neglected.

Conclusion: Present study analysed the challenges faced by this group of people and accordingly recommendation were suggested to improve their quality of care. 

Keywords: Trachea; SF-36 Questionnaire; Decannualation; Global Tracheostomy Collaborative; Percutaneous Tracheostomy

References

1. Raimondi N., et al. “Evidence-based guidelines fors the use of tracheostomy in critically ill patients”. Journal of Critical Care 382017): 304-318.
2. Durbin Jr CG. “Tracheostomy: why, when, and how?” Respiratory Care 55 (2010): 1056-1068.
3. Pereira KD., et al. “Complications of neonatal tracheostomy: a 5-year review”. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 131 (2004): 810-813.
4. Pierson DJ. “Tracheostomy from A to Z: historical context and current challenges”. Respiratory Care4 (2005): 473-475.
5. Goodall EW. “On infectious diseases and epidemiology in the Hippocratic collection: (Section of the History of Medicine)”. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 5 (1934): 525-534.
6. Jackson C. “Tracheotomy”. Laryngoscope 19 (1909): 285-290.
7. Griggs WM., et al. “A simple percutaneous tracheostomy technique”. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 170 (1990): 543-545.
8. Fantoni A and Ripamonti D. “A non-derivative, non-surgical tracheostomy: the translaryngeal method”. Intensive Care Medicine 23 (1997): 386-392.
9. Sheldon CH., et al. “A new method for tracheostomy”. Journal of Neurosurgery 12 (1955): 428-431.
10. Freman BD., et al. “A meta-analysis of prospective trails comparing percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients”. Chest 5 (2000): 1412-1418.
11. Trottier SJ., et al. “Posterior tracheal wall perforation during percutaneous dilational tracheostomy”. Chest115 (1999): 1383-1389.
12. Saritas A., et al. “The role of fiberoptic bronchoscopy monitoring during percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy and its routine use into tracheotomy practice”. Journal of Pakistan Medical Association1 (2016): 83-89.
13. Ware JE and Sherbourne CD. “The MOS-36 item short-form health survey (SF-36). Conceptual frameword and item selection”. Medical Care 30 (1992): 473-483.
14. McHorny CA., et al. “The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs”. Medical Care 31 (1993): 247-263.
15. Chrispin PS., et al. “Short Form 36 in the intensive care unit: assessment of acceptability, reliability and validity of the questinaire”. Anaesthesia 52 (1997): 15-23.
16. Antonelli M., et al. “ “Percutaneous Translaryngeal versus Surgical Tracheostomy: A Randomized Trial with 1-yr Double-Blind Follow-Up”. Critical Care Medicine 33 (2005): 1015-1020.
17. Micalizzi DA and Bismark M. “The heart of health care: parents’ perspectives on patient safety”. Pediatric Clinics of North America 59 (2012): 1233-1246.
18. Cameron TS., et al. “Outcomes of patients with spinal cord injury before and after introduction of an interdisciplinary tracheostomy team”. Critical Care and Resuscitation 11 (2009): 14-19.
19. Pandian V., et al. “Multidisciplinary team approach in the management of tracheostomy patients”. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 147 (2012): 684-691.
20. Nadeem E., et al. “Understanding the components of quality improvement collaboratives: a systematic literature review”. Milbank Q 91 (2013): 354-394.
21. Speed L and Harding KE. “Tracheostomy teams reduce total tracheostomy time and increase speaking valve use: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Journal of Critical Care2 (2013): 216e1-10.
22. Felton M., et al. “The Trachea Collaborative. Inaugural meeting report”. Glasgow, Scotland. The Global Tracheostomy Collaborative.
23. Enamandram S., et al. “Global Tracheostomy Collaborative: the future of quality improvement strategies”. Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports 2 (2017): 13-19.
24. Halum SL., et al. “A multi-institutional analysis of tracheotomy complications”. Laryngoscope1 (2012): 38-45.
25. Bule B and Frings D. “The Role of Group Membership Continuity and Multiple Memberships on Mental Well-Being Amongst Post-Operative Stoma Patients”. Psycho-Oncology 25 (2016): 726-728.

Citation

Citation: Rajwant Kaur and Pawan Kumar. “Quality of Life After Tracheostomy. A Retrospective Study in a Tertiary Care Centre".Acta Scientific Otolaryngology 4.3 (2022): 41-48.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Rajwant Kaur and Pawan Kumar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.