Partridge B L, Barash P G, London M J, McCann H A
Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego.
J Clin Monit. 1992 Jan;8(1):66-73. doi: 10.1007/BF01618091.
This article is the first segment of what we hope will become a regular feature in the Journal of Clinical Monitoring. The Monitoring Dilemmas series is designed for clinicians who are struggling with the information presented by new monitoring. The past decade has seen an explosion in the number and type of clinical monitors in daily use. Health-care providers are increasingly faced with a plethora of monitoring data, often without guidance on how to interpret it. Each Monitoring Dilemma consists of a case report that describes a clinical dilemma brought on by information from a monitor--a dilemma that would not even have been considered had the monitor not been in place or existence. The case reports are sent to experts in the particular fields concerned. To prevent "Monday morning quarterbacking," each reviewer is sent several envelopes, each containing information that progressively reveals more and more about the case. The case is presented as it actually evolved, and the experts comment as the case unfolds. Thus, the reader can share the dilemma with the reviewers, as well as with the original clinicians. We welcome your comments on this new section. We also welcome your own Monitoring Dilemmas. Please contact the Section Editor, Dr Partridge, for more details.
本文是我们希望能成为《临床监测杂志》常规栏目的开篇部分。“监测困境”系列文章是为那些在解读新型监测设备所提供信息时感到困惑的临床医生而设计的。在过去十年中，日常使用的临床监测设备的数量和种类呈爆炸式增长。医疗保健提供者越来越多地面对大量的监测数据，却常常缺乏如何解读这些数据的指导。每一篇“监测困境”文章都包含一个病例报告，描述由监测设备提供的信息所引发的临床困境——如果没有该监测设备，这种困境甚至都不会被考虑到。这些病例报告被发送给相关特定领域的专家。为避免“事后诸葛亮”，每位评审人员会收到几个信封，每个信封中的信息会逐步揭示该病例越来越多的情况。病例按照实际发展过程呈现，专家在病例展开过程中进行评论。这样，读者就能与评审人员以及最初的临床医生一同感受这种困境。我们欢迎您对这一新板块发表评论。我们也欢迎您提供自己遇到的监测困境。如需更多详情，请联系栏目编辑帕特里奇博士。
