RESUMEN
In a cardiac output (CO) sub-study of the Restrictive versus Liberal Fluid Therapy in Major Abdominal Surgery (RELIEF) trial, it was shown that restrictive fluid management was associated with lower cardiac index at the end of surgery. However, the association of the fluid protocol with intraoperative blood pressure was less clear. This paper primarily compares rates of hypotension between the two fluid regimens. The haemodynamic effects of these protocols may increase our understanding of perioperative fluid prescription. Using a data set of arterial pressure and cardiac output measurements, this observational cohort study primarily compares intraoperative hypotension rates defined by a mean arterial pressure < 65 mmHg between liberal and restrictive fluid protocols. Secondary analyses explore predictors of invasive mean arterial pressure and doppler-derived cardiac output, including fluid volume regimens and surgical duration. 105 patients had a combined total of 835 haemodynamic data capture events from the beginning to the end of the surgery. Here we report that a restrictive regimen is not associated with a greater proportion of participants who experience at least one episode of hypotension than the liberal regimen 64.1% vs. 61.5% (mean difference 2.6%, 95% CI - 15.9% to 21%, p = 0.78). Duration of surgery was associated with an increased risk of hypotension (OR 1.05, 1 to 1.1, p = 0.038). A fluid restriction protocol compared to liberal fluid administration is not associated with lower blood pressure.
Asunto(s)
Abdomen , Fluidoterapia , Hipotensión , Humanos , Hipotensión/etiología , Fluidoterapia/métodos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Abdomen/cirugía , Anciano , Gasto Cardíaco , Hemodinámica , Presión Sanguínea , AdultoRESUMEN
Australia's national electronic health record (EHR), My Health Record (MHR), raises concerns about information privacy and the presumption of consent to participation. In contrast to the "opt-out" framework for participation, consumers must "opt-in" to obtain additional privacy features to protect their health information on MHR. We review ethical considerations relating to opt-in and opt-out frameworks in the context of EHRs, discussing potential reasons why consent for additional safeguards is not currently presumed. Exploring the implications of recent amendments to strengthen consumer privacy, we present recommendations to promote equity in health information security for all Australians using MHR.