Critical care nursing quarterly
-
Sedation and analgesia are integral aspects in the care of critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit. In recent years, many of the commonly used sedative agents in the United States have experienced manufacturing and sterility issues leading to decreased availability. In addition, current practice has shifted to providing lighter levels of sedation as clinicians have gained a better understanding of the consequences of prolonged deep sedation. ⋯ Alterations in end-organ function in critically ill patients may also lead to varied responses to commonly used sedatives. With numerous factors impacting choice of sedation in the intensive care unit, fospropofol, ketamine, and remifentanil have been considered potential alternatives to standard therapy. The purpose of this review was to discuss strategies for the safe and effective use of fospropofol, ketamine, and remifentanil for continuous intravenous sedation in critically ill patients.
-
Comparative Study
Glycemic control in a medical intensive care setting: revision of an intensive care unit nurse-driven hyperglycemia protocol.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the addition of rapid-acting insulin bolus for enteral feed coverage and a reduction in basal insulin improve glycemic control and decrease hypoglycemia in a medical intensive care unit. A quasi-experimental posttest design assessing glucose control postimplementation of a revised nurse-driven ICU hyperglycemia protocol was conducted on a 16-bed medical intensive care unit at a multicenter hospital system. A daily report of all patients on the ICU hyperglycemia protocol was automated for the inpatient diabetes management team, and pertinent data were collected. ⋯ The hypoglycemic rate was only 0.72%, and no glucose value was less than 40 mg/dL. In addition, the mean glucose value throughout the study was 160.9 ± 35.6 mg/dL. Findings from this study will hopefully provide insight on an effective way to control glucose within a medical intensive care unit as well as reduce hypoglycemia rates within this setting.
-
Delays in care have been cited as one of the primary contributors of preventable mortality; thus, quality patient safety is often contingent upon the delivery of timely clinical care. Rapid response systems (RRSs) have been touted as one mechanism to improve the ability of suitable staff to respond to deteriorating patients quickly and appropriately. ⋯ While there is mounting evidence that RRSs are a valid strategy for managing obstetric emergencies, reducing adverse events, and improving patient safety, there remains limited insight into the practices underlying the development and execution of these systems. Therefore, the purpose of this article was to synthesize the literature and answer the primary questions necessary for successfully developing, implementing, and evaluating RRSs within inpatient settings-the Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How of RRSs.
-
Comparative Study
What are the hemodynamic and respiratory effects of passive limb exercise for mechanically ventilated patients receiving low-dose vasopressor/inotropic support?
Passive limb exercises (PLEs) are used widely in the management of unconscious patients and an early start is recommended. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of PLEs on hemodynamic and respiratory parameters in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients receiving low-dose vasopressor/inotropic support. The charts of 120 mechanically ventilated patients who underwent PLEs were evaluated retrospectively between January 2000 and July 2002. ⋯ After PLEs in group 1 patients, central venous pressure and mean arterial pressure values increased significantly, and in group 2 patients, central venous pressure increased significantly (P < .05). No statistically significant difference was observed in the rate of change of hemodynamic or respiratory parameters between the 2 groups after the PLEs (P > .05). This retrospective study confirmed that PLEs result in similar hemodynamic and respiratory changes in critically ill patients who received low-dose vasopressor/inotropic support versus those who do not.