Li Jie, Xi Xiu-ming, Luo Xin
Intensive Care Unit, Fuxing Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100038, China.
Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2008 Mar;20(3):155-8.
To survey the implementation of the "surviving sepsis campaign" (SSC) guidelines for the management of severe sepsis and septic shock among Chinese adult intensive care unit (ICU).
One of the questionnaires included the understanding of the SSC guidelines and the diagnosis of severe sepsis and septic shock. The other one was about SSC 6-hour bundle and 24-hour bundle. A 5-point Likert scale (total understanding, partial understanding, understood, hardly understood, not understood) was used to elicit answers about the degree in perceiving the guidelines. The other 5-point Likert scale (always, often, sometimes, rarely, never) was used to elicit answers about the frequency of use of the guidelines. The answers to 3-point Likert scale were combined when the survey was statistically analyzed.
The questionnaires were E-mailed to 50 adult ICUs from June to September in 2007. A total of 224 physicians from 41 adult ICUs participated in answering, with a response rate of 82%. Among all the answers, one was considered not eligible. Altogether there were forty-one ICUs with 512 beds, including 31 general ICUs and 10 specialty ICUs from 14 provinces admitting almost 20,000 patients per year. Eighty point seven percent of intensivists could completely understand the SSC guideline. More intensivists of general ICU could understand the guidelines better than intensivists of specialty ICU [odds ratio (OR)=2.987, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.241-3.981, P<0.01]. More chiefs of ICU could understand of the guidelines better than common intensivists (OR=1.949, 95%CI: 1.641-2.361, P<0.01). Doctors of different professional levels such as attending doctors vs. residents (OR=7.750, 95% CI: 3.711-16.184, P<0.01), chief vs. residents showed different attitude toward the guidelines(OR=6.455, 95%CI: 3.420-12.181, P<0.01). Chiefs understand guidelines better than attending doctors, more attending doctors understand guidelines than residents. There were 80.0% intensivists always used the guidelines during work. There were only 46.6% intensivists believe central venous pressure, but 85.6% doctors were willing to use it in guiding their work. Intensivists, who could trust nurses to carry out the guideline, outnumbered those who did not (P=0.000).
Guidelines for severe sepsis and septic shock guidelines was published in SSC Meeting in 2003. Most Chinese intensivists can understand the SSC guidelines and always use it during their clinical practice.
调查中国成人重症监护病房(ICU)中“拯救脓毒症运动”(SSC)指南在严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克管理中的实施情况。
一份问卷包括对SSC指南的理解以及严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克的诊断。另一份问卷是关于SSC 6小时集束治疗和24小时集束治疗。采用5级李克特量表(完全理解、部分理解、理解、几乎不理解、不理解)来获取关于对指南感知程度的答案。另一个5级李克特量表(总是、经常、有时、很少、从不)用于获取关于指南使用频率的答案。在进行统计分析时,将3级李克特量表的答案合并。
问卷于2007年6月至9月通过电子邮件发送给50个成人ICU。来自41个成人ICU的224名医生参与回答,回复率为82%。在所有答案中,有一个被认为不合格。共有41个ICU,512张床位,包括来自14个省份的31个综合ICU和10个专科ICU,每年收治近20000名患者。87.0%的重症监护医生能够完全理解SSC指南。综合ICU的重症监护医生比专科ICU的重症监护医生对指南的理解更好[优势比(OR)=2.987,95%置信区间(CI):2.241 - 3.981,P<0.01]。ICU主任比普通重症监护医生对指南的理解更好(OR=1.949,95%CI:1.641 - 2.361,P<0.01)。不同专业水平的医生,如主治医师与住院医师(OR=7.750,95%CI:3.711 - 16.184,P<0.01)、主任与住院医师对指南的态度不同(OR=6.455,95%CI:3.420 - 12.181,P<0.01)。主任比主治医师对指南的理解更好,更多的主治医师比住院医师理解指南。80.0%的重症监护医生在工作中总是使用该指南。只有46.6%的重症监护医生相信中心静脉压,但85.6%的医生愿意在指导工作中使用它。信任护士执行该指南的重症监护医生人数多于不信任的(P=0.000)。
严重脓毒症和脓毒性休克指南于2003年在SSC会议上发布。大多数中国重症监护医生能够理解SSC指南,并在临床实践中经常使用。