RESUMEN
Handover is a frequent and complex task that also implies the transfer of the responsibility of the care. The deficiencies in this process are associated with important gaps in clinical safety and also in patient and professional dissatisfaction, as well as increasing health cost. Efforts to standardize this process have increased in recent years, appearing numerous mnemonic tools. Despite this, local are heterogeneous and the level of training in this area is low. The purpose of this review is to highlight the importance of IT while providing a methodological structure that favors effective IT in ICU, reducing the risk associated with this process. Specifically, this document refers to the handover that is established during shift changes or nursing shifts, during the transfer of patients to other diagnostic and therapeutic areas, and to discharge from the ICU. Emergency situations and the potential participation of patients and relatives are also considered. Formulas for measuring quality are finally proposed and potential improvements are mentioned especially in the field of training.
Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos , Pase de Guardia , Lista de Verificación , Barreras de Comunicación , Cuidados Críticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistemas de Información en Hospital/organización & administración , Registros de Hospitales , Humanos , Comunicación Interdisciplinaria , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Pase de Guardia/estadística & datos numéricos , EspañaRESUMEN
OBJETIVOS: 1) Valorar la utilidad pronóstica de la determinación inicial y seriada de la proteína fijadora de lipopolisacáridos (LBP) y de la procalcitonina (PCT) y 2) evaluar si su adicción a los scores de gravedad mejoraría su valor pronóstico. DISEÑO: Estudio prospectivo observacional. ÁMBITO: Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos de un hospital general universitario. PACIENTES: Se incluyó a 100 pacientes ingresados por sepsis grave/shock séptico. Variables de interés Datos demográficos, APACHE II y SOFA, concentración de PCT y LBP inicial y a las 48 h y mortalidad hospitalaria. RESULTADOS: Los scores APACHE II al ingreso y SOFA a las 48 h presentaron el mayor rendimiento como predictores de mortalidad hospitalaria (AUC ROC: 0,75 para ambos). La concentración inicial de PCT y LBP y el aclaramiento de LBP fueron similares en pacientes supervivientes y fallecidos. Solo el aclaramiento de PCT fue superior en supervivientes respecto a los fallecidos (AUC ROC: 0,66). La combinación de los scores de gravedad con el aclaramiento de PCT no mejoró su valor pronóstico. CONCLUSIONES: La concentración inicial de LBP y de PCT y el aclaramiento de LBP no presentaron valor pronóstico en pacientes con sepsis grave/shock séptico. Solo el aclaramiento de PCT se comportó como predictor de mortalidad hospitalaria. El rendimiento de los scores APACHE II al ingreso y SOFA a las 48 h fue superior al de los biomarcadores analizados y la adición del aclaramiento de PCT no aumentó su valor pronóstico
AIMS: 1) To assess the prognostic value of levels on admission and serial measurements of lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in relation to in-hospital mortality; and 2) to determine whether the addition of these parameters to severity scores (APACHE II and SOFA) is able to improve prognostic accuracy. DESIGN: A single-center, prospective observational study was carried out. Setting Intensive Care unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred severe sepsis and septic shock patients were included. Data collected Demographic data, APACHE II and SOFA scores, PCT and LBP levels on admission and after 48hours, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The best area under the curve for predicting in-hospital mortality corresponded to APACHE II on admission and SOFA after 48h (AUC ROC: 0.75 for both). PCT and LBP levels on admission and LBP clearance were not statistically different between in-hospital survivors and non-survivors. Only PCT clearance was higher among in-hospital survivors than in non-survivors (AUC ROC: 0.66). The combination of severity scores and PCT clearance did not result in superior areas under the curve. CONCLUSIONS: LBP and PCT levels on admission and LBP clearance showed no prognostic value in severe sepsis and septic shock patients. Only PCT clearance was predictive of in-hospital mortality. The prognostic accuracy was significantly better for APACHE on admission and SOFA after 48h than for any of the analyzed biomarkers, and the addition of PCT clearance did not improve their prognostic value
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Lipopolisacáridos/análisis , Proteínas Portadoras/análisis , Receptores de Calcitonina/metabolismo , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Biomarcadores/análisis , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
AIMS: 1) To assess the prognostic value of levels on admission and serial measurements of lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in relation to in-hospital mortality; and 2) to determine whether the addition of these parameters to severity scores (APACHE II and SOFA) is able to improve prognostic accuracy. DESIGN: A single-center, prospective observational study was carried out. SETTING: Intensive Care unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred severe sepsis and septic shock patients were included. DATA COLLECTED: Demographic data, APACHE II and SOFA scores, PCT and LBP levels on admission and after 48 hours, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The best area under the curve for predicting in-hospital mortality corresponded to APACHE II on admission and SOFA after 48 h (AUC ROC: 0.75 for both). PCT and LBP levels on admission and LBP clearance were not statistically different between in-hospital survivors and non-survivors. Only PCT clearance was higher among in-hospital survivors than in non-survivors (AUC ROC: 0.66). The combination of severity scores and PCT clearance did not result in superior areas under the curve. CONCLUSIONS: LBP and PCT levels on admission and LBP clearance showed no prognostic value in severe sepsis and septic shock patients. Only PCT clearance was predictive of in-hospital mortality. The prognostic accuracy was significantly better for APACHE on admission and SOFA after 48 h than for any of the analyzed biomarkers, and the addition of PCT clearance did not improve their prognostic value.