American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 2020
Accuracy of Measuring Bladder Volumes With Ultrasound and Bladder Scanning.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schallom Marilyn, Prentice Donna, Sona Carrie, Vyers Kara, Arroyo Cassandra, Wessman Brian, Ablordeppey Enyo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Removal of urinary catheters depends on accurate noninvasive measurements of bladder volume. Patients with acute kidney injury often have low bladder volumes/ascites, possibly causing measurement inaccuracy.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of bladder volumes measured with bladder scanning and 2-dimensional ultrasound (US) compared with urinary catheterization among different types of clinicians.
METHODS: Prospective correlational descriptive study of 73 adult critical care patients with low urine output receiving hemodialysis or unable to void. Bladder volumes were independently measured by (1) a physician and an advanced practice registered nurse using US, (2) an advanced practice registered nurse and a bedside nurse using bladder scanning, and (3) urinary catheterization (cath). Bland-Altman and χ2 analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: Mean (SD) cath volume was 171.7 (269.7) mL (range, 0-1100 mL). Abdominal fluid was observed in 28% of patients. Bias was -1.3 mL for US vs cath and 3.3 mL for bladder scanning vs cath. For patients with abdominal fluid and cath volume less than 150 mL, decisions to not catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on US measurements (97%-100%) than when based on bladder scanning measurements (86%-89%; P = .02). In patients with cath volume of 300 mL or more, decisions to catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on bladder scanning measurements (94%-100%) than when based on horizontal US measurements (50%-56%; P = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Bladder volume can be measured accurately with bladder scanning or US, but abdominal fluid remains a confounding factor limiting accuracy of bladder scanning.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of bladder volumes measured with bladder scanning and 2-dimensional ultrasound (US) compared with urinary catheterization among different types of clinicians.
METHODS: Prospective correlational descriptive study of 73 adult critical care patients with low urine output receiving hemodialysis or unable to void. Bladder volumes were independently measured by (1) a physician and an advanced practice registered nurse using US, (2) an advanced practice registered nurse and a bedside nurse using bladder scanning, and (3) urinary catheterization (cath). Bland-Altman and χ2 analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: Mean (SD) cath volume was 171.7 (269.7) mL (range, 0-1100 mL). Abdominal fluid was observed in 28% of patients. Bias was -1.3 mL for US vs cath and 3.3 mL for bladder scanning vs cath. For patients with abdominal fluid and cath volume less than 150 mL, decisions to not catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on US measurements (97%-100%) than when based on bladder scanning measurements (86%-89%; P = .02). In patients with cath volume of 300 mL or more, decisions to catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on bladder scanning measurements (94%-100%) than when based on horizontal US measurements (50%-56%; P = .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Bladder volume can be measured accurately with bladder scanning or US, but abdominal fluid remains a confounding factor limiting accuracy of bladder scanning.