Dias Fernando Suparregui, Rezende Ederlon Alves de Carvalho, Mendes Ciro Leite, Silva João Manoel, Sanches Joel Lyra
Departamento de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Pompéia, Caxias do Sul, RS, Brasil.
Unidade de Terapia Intensiva, Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual "Francisco Morato de Oliveira", São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014 Oct-Dec;26(4):360-6. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20140055.
In Brazil, there are no data on the preferences of intensivists regarding hemodynamic monitoring methods. The present study aimed to identify the methods used by national intensivists, the hemodynamic variables they consider important, the regional differences, the reasons for choosing a particular method, and the use of protocols and continued training.
National intensivists were invited to answer an electronic questionnaire during three intensive care events and later, through the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira portal, between March and October 2009. Demographic data and aspects related to the respondent preferences regarding hemodynamic monitoring were researched.
In total, 211 professionals answered the questionnaire. Private hospitals showed higher availability of resources for hemodynamic monitoring than did public institutions. The pulmonary artery catheter was considered the most trusted by 56.9% of the respondents, followed by echocardiograms, at 22.3%. Cardiac output was considered the most important variable. Other variables also considered relevant were mixed/central venous oxygen saturation, pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, and right ventricular end-diastolic volume. Echocardiography was the most used method (64.5%), followed by pulmonary artery catheter (49.3%). Only half of respondents used treatment protocols, and 25% worked in continuing education programs in hemodynamic monitoring.
Hemodynamic monitoring has a greater availability in intensive care units of private institutions in Brazil. Echocardiography was the most used monitoring method, but the pulmonary artery catheter remains the most reliable. The implementation of treatment protocols and continuing education programs in hemodynamic monitoring in Brazil is still insufficient.
在巴西,尚无关于重症监护医生对血流动力学监测方法偏好的数据。本研究旨在确定国内重症监护医生所使用的方法、他们认为重要的血流动力学变量、地区差异、选择特定方法的原因以及方案的使用和继续培训情况。
在2009年3月至10月期间的三次重症监护活动中,邀请国内重症监护医生回答一份电子问卷,随后通过巴西重症医学协会门户网站进行调查。研究了人口统计学数据以及与受访者对血流动力学监测偏好相关的方面。
共有211名专业人员回答了问卷。私立医院在血流动力学监测方面的资源可用性高于公共机构。56.9%的受访者认为肺动脉导管最值得信赖,其次是超声心动图,占22.3%。心输出量被认为是最重要的变量。其他也被认为相关的变量包括混合/中心静脉血氧饱和度、肺动脉闭塞压和右心室舒张末期容积。超声心动图是使用最多的方法(64.5%),其次是肺动脉导管(49.3%)。只有一半的受访者使用治疗方案,25%的人参与了血流动力学监测的继续教育项目。
在巴西,私立机构的重症监护病房中血流动力学监测的可用性更高。超声心动图是使用最多的监测方法,但肺动脉导管仍然是最可靠的。巴西在血流动力学监测方面治疗方案的实施和继续教育项目仍不足。