RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: This survey aimed to assess the state-of-the-art of current practices on critical results reporting among Portuguese Clinical Pathology Laboratories. The results of the survey will set basis for future standardization and national guideline development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey was transmitted to 49 Clinical Pathology Laboratories among public hospitals inserted in the Portuguese National Health System. In 27 questions, laboratories were asked about their critical results procedures, critical results list, reporting and further education. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel v.2016 and MedCalc Statistical Software version 12.5.0.0 (Ostend, Belgium). Where applicable, the comparison of proportions was used to estimate the level of significance (P<0.05). RESULTS: The response rate was 44/49 (90%), including 36 participants with a defined critical results reporting procedure. Among them, 31 laboratories defined a critical results list, mainly based on published literature (27/31). There was a statistically significant number of laboratories (P=0.019, 24/30) that report different critical results depending on the patient's age, but regardless of disease, ethnicity and location (P>0.05). The majority of laboratories (60%) report critical results via telephone within 15 minutes. Critical results are usually reported by clinical pathologists to physicians. Twenty-five laboratories periodically reevaluate their critical results list. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that most of the Portuguese hospitals have a critical results policy, this survey showed high variability among the hospitals concerning critical results reporting practices and critical results list. This survey points out that nationally established procedures and guidelines are urgent step for critical results standardization.
RESUMO
Lidocaine is commonly used for local anesthesia during fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). It has been suggested that the total dose of lidocaine should be limited to 300-400 mg (or < 8.2 mg/kg). Lidocaine toxicity is directly correlated with its concentration in the blood and a threshold above which the side effects become more likely has been put at a plasma level of 5 microg/ml. The aim of our study was to determine plasmatic lidocaine concentrations (PLC), how often the PLC fall into the potentially toxic range and its correlation with adverse reactions. PLC were recorded in 30 patients undergoing FOB. Lidocaine was administered as a 2% gel, 10% spray and 2% solution. Venous blood samples were taken before the beginning of local anesthesia and at 20, 30 and 40 min thereafter. The mean total amount of lidocaine administered was 746.3 +/- 159.5 mg (11.6 +/- 3.1 mg/kg). Before the beginning of anesthesia, no significant levels of lidocaine were measurable in the patients. PLC were 3.2 +/- 1.7 (g/ml at 20 min., 3.3 +/- 1.7 microg/ml at 30 min. and 3.0 +/- 1.5 microg/ml at 40 min. The PLC exceeded toxic levels in 6 patients, but no complications were observed. Our data show that although the amount of lidocaine used in this study exceeded the recommended highest dose, no subjects had signs of toxicity. A maximum dose of lidocaine for topical anesthesia should be determined despite the fact that an average total dose superior to 400 mg appears to be safe in patients undergoing FOB.
