High Risk/High Reward: Collaborative Planning For Critically Ill Obstetrical Patients

1994 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 202-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leith Merrow Mullaly ◽  
Lucille Belgrave ◽  
Margaret Wentzel
Critical Care ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. R9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark van den Boogaard ◽  
Lisette Schoonhoven ◽  
Theo van Achterberg ◽  
Johannes G van der Hoeven ◽  
Peter Pickkers

Physics World ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 9i-9i
Author(s):  
Ian Randall
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabela Bernasconi JOSÉ ◽  
Vânia Aparecida LEANDRO-MERHI ◽  
José Luis Braga de AQUINO

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Enteral nutritional therapy (ENT) is the best route for the nutrition of critically ill patients with improved impact on the clinical treatment of such patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the energy and protein supply of ENT in critically ill in-patients of an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). METHODS: Prospective longitudinal study conducted with 82 critically ill in-patients of an ICU, receiving ENT. Anthropometric variables, laboratory tests (albumin, CRP, CRP/albumin ratio), NUTRIC-score and Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS-2002), energy and protein goals, and the inadequacies and complications of ENT were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square or Fischer tests and the Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: A total of 48.78% patients were at high nutritional risk based on NUTRIC score. In the CRP/albumin ratio, 85.37% patients presented with a high risk of complications. There was a statistically significant difference (P<0.0001) for all comparisons made between the target, prescription and ENT infusion, and 72% of the quantities prescribed for both calories and proteins was infused. It was observed that the difference between the prescription and the infusion was 14.63% (±10.81) for calories and 14.21% (±10.5) for proteins, with statistically significant difference (P<0.0001). In the relationship between prescription and infusion of calories and proteins, the only significant association was that of patients at high risk of CRP/albumin ratio, of which almost 94% received less than 80% of the energy and protein volume prescribed (P=0.0111). CONCLUSION: The administration of ENT in severely ill patients does not meet their actual energy and protein needs. The high occurrence of infusion inadequacies, compared to prescription and to the goals set can generate a negative nutritional balance.


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-130
Author(s):  
Trenton C. Wray ◽  
Kristin Schmid ◽  
Darren Braude ◽  
Keith Azevedo ◽  
Todd Dettmer ◽  
...  

Introduction: The use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) by intensivist physicians (IPs) and emergency physicians (EPs) in critically ill patients is increasing in the intensive care unit, emergency department, and prehospital environments. Coagulopathy and thrombocytopenia are common in critically ill patients. The risk of performing TEE in these patients is unknown. The goal of this study was to assess whether TEE is safe when performed by IPs or EPs in critically ill patients with high bleeding risk (HBR). Methods: All TEEs performed by an IP or EP between January 1, 2016, and July 31, 2019, were reviewed as part of a quality assurance database. A TEE performed on a patient was deemed HBR if the patient met at least one of the following criteria: undergoing therapeutic anticoagulation, had an INR > 2, activated partial thromboplastin time >40 seconds, fibrinogen <150 mg/dL, and/or platelet count <50 000/μL. The medical record was reviewed on each patient to determine whether upper esophageal bleeding, oropharyngeal bleeding, esophageal perforation, or dislodgement of an artificial airway occurred during or after the TEE. Results: A total of 228 examinations were reviewed: 80 in the high-risk group and 148 in the low-risk group (LBR). There were complications potentially attributable to TEE in 8 (4%) of the 228 exams. Total complications were not different between groups: 4 (5%) in the HBR group versus 4 (3%) in the LBR group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89 [0.34-10.44], P =.368). Upper esophageal bleeding occurred in 5 total examinations (2%), which was not different between groups: 3 (4%) in the HBR group and 2 (1%) in the LBR group (OR = 2.84 [0.31-34.55], P = .238). There were no deaths attributable to TEE in either group. Conclusion: Transesophageal echocardiography can be safely performed by IPs and EPs in critically ill patients at high risk of bleeding with minimal complications.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document