ABSTRACT
IntroducciónLa guía clínica para el manejo de la sepsis recomienda usar muestras de sangre arterial para el control glucémico. Un estudio multicéntrico en 86 unidades de cuidados intensivos españolas reveló que el 85,4% de estas utilizaban punción capilar.ObjetivoAnalizar la fiabilidad de la glucemia comparando diferentes muestras sanguíneas (arterial, venosa, capilar) e instrumentos (glucómetros, gasómetros, laboratorio central). Secundariamente, estimar el efecto de variables confusoras y el rendimiento de los instrumentos de medición determinados por las diferentes normas de calidad.MetodologíaRevisión sistemática y metanálisis con búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, CINAHL y Embase en septiembre-2021 y septiembre-2022, sin límites temporales ni idiomáticos. Fuentes de literatura gris: DART-Europe, OpenGrey y Google Académico. Resultados resumidos mediante síntesis cualitativa (descripción de resultados, características de los estudios) y cuantitativa (metanálisis para evaluar la diferencia de medias estandarizadas). Calidad metodológica de artículos evaluada con Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocolo: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultadosSe incluyeron un total de 32 artículos y 5.451 pacientes. No se obtuvieron discrepancias entre muestras arteriales con glucómetro vs. laboratorio (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,01 [−0,12 a 0,14] mg/dL). En cambio, muestras arteriales con gasómetro sí sobreestimaron de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,12 [0,01 a 0,24] mg/dL). La misma tendencia presentan capilares con glucómetro, aunque no de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,07 [−0,02 a 0,15] mg/dL). Hay discrepancia entre los estudios sobre el efecto del hematocrito y el equilibrio ácido-base. El mayor consenso se da en la poca concordancia del glucómetro con muestras capilares vs. laboratorio en presencia de shock y soporte vasopresor, situación de fallo renal o durante el tratamiento con vitamina C.Conclusiones... (AU)
IntroductionThe clinical guideline for the management of sepsis recommends using arterial blood samples for glycaemic control. A multicentre study in 86 Spanish intensive care units revealed that 85.4% of these used capillary puncture.ObjectiveTo analyse the reliability of glycaemia by comparing different blood samples (arterial, venous, capillary) and instruments (glucometers, gasometers, central laboratory). Secondarily, to estimate the effect of confounding variables and the performance of measuring instruments as determined by different quality standards.MethodologySystematic review and meta-analysis with search in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases in September-2021 and September-2022, with no time or language limits. Grey literature sources: DART-Europe, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Results summarised by qualitative (description of results, study characteristics) and quantitative (meta-analysis to assess standardised mean difference) synthesis. Methodological quality of articles assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocol: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultsA total of 32 articles and 5451 patients were included. No discrepancies were obtained between arterial glucometer vs. laboratory samples (bias [95%CI]: 0.01 [−0.12 to 0.14] mg/dL). In contrast, arterial samples with a gasometer did significantly overestimate (bias [95%CI]: 0.12 [0.01 to 0.24] mg/dL). The same trend is seen in capillaries with a glucometer, although not significantly (bias [95%CI]: 0.07 [−0.02 to 0.15] mg/dL). There is discrepancy between studies on the effect of haematocrit and acid-base balance. The greatest consensus is on the poor agreement of glucometer with capillary vs. laboratory samples in the presence of shock and vasopressor support, renal failure or during vitamin C treatment.Conclusions... (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , /methods , /statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units , Critical Illness , Data Accuracy , SpainABSTRACT
IntroducciónLa guía clínica para el manejo de la sepsis recomienda usar muestras de sangre arterial para el control glucémico. Un estudio multicéntrico en 86 unidades de cuidados intensivos españolas reveló que el 85,4% de estas utilizaban punción capilar.ObjetivoAnalizar la fiabilidad de la glucemia comparando diferentes muestras sanguíneas (arterial, venosa, capilar) e instrumentos (glucómetros, gasómetros, laboratorio central). Secundariamente, estimar el efecto de variables confusoras y el rendimiento de los instrumentos de medición determinados por las diferentes normas de calidad.MetodologíaRevisión sistemática y metanálisis con búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, CINAHL y Embase en septiembre-2021 y septiembre-2022, sin límites temporales ni idiomáticos. Fuentes de literatura gris: DART-Europe, OpenGrey y Google Académico. Resultados resumidos mediante síntesis cualitativa (descripción de resultados, características de los estudios) y cuantitativa (metanálisis para evaluar la diferencia de medias estandarizadas). Calidad metodológica de artículos evaluada con Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocolo: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultadosSe incluyeron un total de 32 artículos y 5.451 pacientes. No se obtuvieron discrepancias entre muestras arteriales con glucómetro vs. laboratorio (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,01 [−0,12 a 0,14] mg/dL). En cambio, muestras arteriales con gasómetro sí sobreestimaron de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,12 [0,01 a 0,24] mg/dL). La misma tendencia presentan capilares con glucómetro, aunque no de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,07 [−0,02 a 0,15] mg/dL). Hay discrepancia entre los estudios sobre el efecto del hematocrito y el equilibrio ácido-base. El mayor consenso se da en la poca concordancia del glucómetro con muestras capilares vs. laboratorio en presencia de shock y soporte vasopresor, situación de fallo renal o durante el tratamiento con vitamina C.Conclusiones... (AU)
IntroductionThe clinical guideline for the management of sepsis recommends using arterial blood samples for glycaemic control. A multicentre study in 86 Spanish intensive care units revealed that 85.4% of these used capillary puncture.ObjectiveTo analyse the reliability of glycaemia by comparing different blood samples (arterial, venous, capillary) and instruments (glucometers, gasometers, central laboratory). Secondarily, to estimate the effect of confounding variables and the performance of measuring instruments as determined by different quality standards.MethodologySystematic review and meta-analysis with search in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases in September-2021 and September-2022, with no time or language limits. Grey literature sources: DART-Europe, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Results summarised by qualitative (description of results, study characteristics) and quantitative (meta-analysis to assess standardised mean difference) synthesis. Methodological quality of articles assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocol: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultsA total of 32 articles and 5451 patients were included. No discrepancies were obtained between arterial glucometer vs. laboratory samples (bias [95%CI]: 0.01 [−0.12 to 0.14] mg/dL). In contrast, arterial samples with a gasometer did significantly overestimate (bias [95%CI]: 0.12 [0.01 to 0.24] mg/dL). The same trend is seen in capillaries with a glucometer, although not significantly (bias [95%CI]: 0.07 [−0.02 to 0.15] mg/dL). There is discrepancy between studies on the effect of haematocrit and acid-base balance. The greatest consensus is on the poor agreement of glucometer with capillary vs. laboratory samples in the presence of shock and vasopressor support, renal failure or during vitamin C treatment.Conclusions... (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , /methods , /statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units , Critical Illness , Data Accuracy , SpainABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The clinical guideline for the management of sepsis, recommends using arterial blood samples for glycaemic control. A multicentre study in 86 Spanish intensive care units (ICU) revealed that 85.4% of ICUs used capillary puncture. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the reliability of glycaemia by comparing different blood samples (arterial, venous, capillary) and instruments (glucometers, gasometers, central laboratory). Secondarily, to estimate the effect of confounding variables and the performance of measuring instruments as determined by different quality standards. METHODOLOGY: Systematic review and meta-analysis with search in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases in September-2021 and September-2022, with no time or language limits. Grey literature sources: DART-Europe, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Results summarised by qualitative (description of results, study characteristics) and quantitative (meta-analysis to assess standardised mean difference) synthesis. Methodological quality of articles assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). PROTOCOL: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP. RESULTS: A total of 32 articles and 5451 patients were included. No discrepancies were obtained between arterial glucometer vs laboratory samples [bias (95%CI): 0.01 (-0.12 to 0.14) mg/dL]. In contrast, arterial samples with a gasometer did significantly overestimate [bias (95%CI): 0.12 (0.01 to 0.24) mg/dL]. The same trend is seen in capillaries with a glucometer, although not significantly [bias (95%CI): 0.07 (--0.02 to 0.15) mg/dL]. There is discrepancy between studies on the effect of haematocrit and acid-base balance. The greatest consensus is on the poor agreement of glucometer with capillary vs laboratory samples in the presence of shock and vasopressor support, renal failure or during vitamin C treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence to date recommends the use of arterial blood with a blood glucose meter for better reliability of glycaemic analysis and less effect of possible confounding variables, frequently present in the critically ill adult patient.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Blood Glucose , Adult , Humans , Critical Illness , Reproducibility of Results , Acid-Base Equilibrium , Multicenter Studies as TopicABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Adjusting human resources to intensive care units (ICU) workload is essential. The development of software for estimating nursing workload using mobile devices (smartphone, smartwatch and/or tablets) could be a useful tool and complement and/or improve the measurements made with the Nursing Activities Score (NAS), a validated scale. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the validity of devices and mobile applications for estimating ICU nurses' workloads and their comparison with NAS. METHODOLOGY: Systematised literature review from 2009 to 2021 informed by flowchart PRISMA-2020 and its extension PRISMA-S. Critical reading (CASPe). Steps:elaboration of the research question, concept identification (English and Spanish natural language and descriptors MesH, Emtree and CINAHL Headings), search strategy and data collection in MEDlars online (MEDLINE), OVID, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Elsevier, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EBSCO and Web of Science (WoS); data extraction and evaluation, analysis and synthesis of results. We included studies with abstracts published in English and Spanish conducted in ICU with workload measurement (preferably NAS) using mobile devices. RESULTS: 223 studies of which 84 in MEDLINE, 50 in CINAHL, 48 in EMBASE, 33 in WOS and 8 in other sources. 117 were eligible for screening, of which 95 did not meet the inclusion criteria. 22 studies were screened for eligibility, of which 17 were excluded. Five articles were selected for final review. None of the studies provided results on costs, acceptance testing, validity, reliability, system problems, advantages, disadvantages or resource estimation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The use of mobile devices and applications to measure ICU workloads is not yet validated and has not been shown to be more accurate than traditional NAS assessment.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anemia associated with blood extraction for diagnostic purposes is a highly prevalent entity in intensive care units (ICU) for adults. The evidence recommends its prevention through different strategies, among which we can find the use of closed blood sampling systems (CBSS). Different experimental studies support the use of these devices. OBJECTIVE: To identify knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness of CBSS in ICU patients. METHODS: Scoping review with search in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Institute databases, between September-2021 and September-2022. No time, language, or other limits were applied to ensure the recovery of all relevant studies. Gray literature sources: DART-Europe, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Two researchers independently reviewed titles and abstracts and assessed full texts against the inclusion criteria. The following data was extracted for each study: design and sample, inclusion and exclusion criteria, variables, type of CBSS, results and conclusions. RESULTS: 18 articles were included in the final review, 11 clinical trials (RCTs) published between 1992 and 2014. Three systematic reviews were found, but they only analyzed the effect of CBSS in reducing blood loss, hemoglobin stabilization, and the need for transfusion. Five of the RCTs analyzed the risk of infection, one catheter complications, and two alterations in blood pressure readings. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CBSS is recommended to reduce blood loss in ICUs. However, there are discrepancies about their ability to prevent anemia and/or the need for blood transfusion. Its use does not increase catheter-related infection rates or alter the measurement of mean arterial pressure.
ABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Databases, Bibliographic , Search Engine , Information Literacy , Information Seeking BehaviorABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Education, Nursing/trends , Databases, Bibliographic , Education, Nursing/methods , Internet Access , Libraries, DigitalABSTRACT
Nos encontramos inmersos en un nuevo paradigma en el acceso a la información científica la cual estará en el futuro disponible y se transmitirá exclusivamente en formato electrónico. El concepto de uso de internet como almacén de información ha cambiado poniendo énfasis en la interactividad y posibilidad de compartir contenidos. La Web 2.0 ha revolucionado la forma de entender internet promoviendo la participación de las personas que acceden a ella colaborando en su propia construcción mediante herramientas intuitivas y de fácil utilización. La Medicina 2.0 supone la participación del usuario en la elaboración, selección y valoración de contenidos. El futuro del acceso a la información está en los servicios de la Medicina 2.0. El objetivo de este artículo es hacer un repaso de las herramientas e instrumentos disponibles para los profesionales sanitarios para el acceso a la información científica, haciendo especial énfasis en las herramientas 2.0(AU)
We are immersed in a new paradigm for scientific information access that, in the future, will be only be available and transmitted in electronic format. The concept of using internet as information storage has changed, with emphasis on its interactivity and possibility to share contents. The Web 2.0 has revolutionized the way of internet is understood, promoting the participation of those who access it, collaborating in its construction per se through intuitive and easy-to-use tools. Medicine 2.0 means supposes the participation of the user in the design, selection and evaluation of the contents. The future of access to information is through Medicine 2.0 services. The aim of this paper is to review the tools and instruments available for health care professionals to access scientific information, with special emphasis on web 2.0 tools(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Information Services/organization & administration , Information Services/standards , Information Services , Medical Informatics/trends , Information Systems/trends , Information Systems , 51835/statistics & numerical data , Scientific Research and Technological Development , Internet/trends , Internet , /trends , PeriodicalABSTRACT
We are immersed in a new paradigm for scientific information access that, in the future, will be only be available and transmitted in electronic format. The concept of using internet as information storage has changed, with emphasis on its interactivity and possibility to share contents. The Web 2.0 has revolutionized the way of internet is understood, promoting the participation of those who access it, collaborating in its construction per se through intuitive and easy-to-use tools. Medicine 2.0 means supposes the participation of the user in the design, selection and evaluation of the contents. The future of access to information is through Medicine 2.0 services. The aim of this paper is to review the tools and instruments available for health care professionals to access scientific information, with special emphasis on web 2.0 tools.
Subject(s)
Databases, Bibliographic , Information Dissemination , Databases, Bibliographic/trends , ForecastingABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To study the contribution of Primary Care doctors to the understanding of adverse side-effects to drugs, through publication in the medical bibliography of cases of cough produced by Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. DESIGN: A retrospective observation study. SUBJECTS: The articles found in a bibliographic search through the data bases MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica and Indice Médico Español, all in CD-ROM, for the period 1982-1991. The notifications found of cases relating to cough produced by ACE inhibitors were evaluated through a minimum information data questionnaire. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A minimum information questionnaire was used. 119 cases of patients were found in 53 articles. The average of authors and references per article was 2.88 and 8.54, respectively. The most frequent type of article was the letter, with Enalapril being the drug responsible for the cough in the majority of cases. All the articles studied included data from at least 6 of the minimum information items, the most common being: age, gender, dosage, reason for prescription, remission of the adverse reaction on stopping the medication and information on previous publications. Primary Care authors contributed more information in their articles than those authors who did not come from Primary Care. There is a statistically significant difference (p < 0.005) in the information items which refer to information on the presence of other illnesses and to the study of other pathological processes. CONCLUSIONS: The Primary Care authors published less cases of cough caused by ACE inhibitors, although their quality is similar to those from other sources. The information contributed which can be considered minimum was superior to that reviewed in previous studies.
