Chinese medical journal · 2015
Extensive variability in vasoactive agent therapy: a nationwide survey in Chinese intensive care units.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Pei Xian-Bo, Ma Peng-Lin, Li Jian-Guo, Du Zhao-Hui, Zhou Qing, Lu Zhang-Hong, Yun Luo, Hu Bo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Inconsistencies in the use of the vasoactive agent therapy to treat shock are found in previous studies. A descriptive study was proposed to investigate current use of vasoactive agents for patients with shock in Chinese intensive care settings.
METHODS: A nationwide survey of physicians was conducted from August 17 to December 30, 2012. Physicians were asked to complete a questionnaire which focused on the selection of vasoactive agents, management in the use of vasopressor/inotropic therapy, monitoring protocols when using these agents, and demographic characteristics.
RESULTS: The response rate was 65.1% with physicians returning 586 valid questionnaires. Norepinephrine was the first choice of a vasopressor used to treat septic shock by 70.8% of respondents; 73.4% of respondents favored dopamine for hypovolemic shock; and 68.3% of respondents preferred dopamine for cardiogenic shock. Dobutamine was selected by 84.1%, 64.5%, and 60.6% of respondents for septic, hypovolemic, and cardiogenic shock, respectively. Vasodilator agents were prescribed by physicians in the management of cardiogenic shock (67.1%) rather than for septic (32.3%) and hypovolemic shock (6.5%). A significant number of physicians working in teaching hospitals were using vasoactive agents in an appropriate manner when compared to physicians in nonteaching hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Vasoactive agent use for treatment of shock is inconsistent according to self-report by Chinese intensive care physicians; however, the variation in use depends upon the form of shock being treated and the type of hospital; thus, corresponding educational programs about vasoactive agent use for shock management should be considered.
METHODS: A nationwide survey of physicians was conducted from August 17 to December 30, 2012. Physicians were asked to complete a questionnaire which focused on the selection of vasoactive agents, management in the use of vasopressor/inotropic therapy, monitoring protocols when using these agents, and demographic characteristics.
RESULTS: The response rate was 65.1% with physicians returning 586 valid questionnaires. Norepinephrine was the first choice of a vasopressor used to treat septic shock by 70.8% of respondents; 73.4% of respondents favored dopamine for hypovolemic shock; and 68.3% of respondents preferred dopamine for cardiogenic shock. Dobutamine was selected by 84.1%, 64.5%, and 60.6% of respondents for septic, hypovolemic, and cardiogenic shock, respectively. Vasodilator agents were prescribed by physicians in the management of cardiogenic shock (67.1%) rather than for septic (32.3%) and hypovolemic shock (6.5%). A significant number of physicians working in teaching hospitals were using vasoactive agents in an appropriate manner when compared to physicians in nonteaching hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Vasoactive agent use for treatment of shock is inconsistent according to self-report by Chinese intensive care physicians; however, the variation in use depends upon the form of shock being treated and the type of hospital; thus, corresponding educational programs about vasoactive agent use for shock management should be considered.