Suppr超能文献

常规神经肌肉监测和一致逆转实践的障碍和辅助手段:一项定性研究。

Barriers and aids to routine neuromuscular monitoring and consistent reversal practice-A qualitative study.

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Department of Anaesthesiology, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.

出版信息

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2020 Sep;64(8):1089-1099. doi: 10.1111/aas.13606. Epub 2020 May 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Neuromuscular monitoring is recommended whenever a neuromuscular blocking agent is administered, but surveys have demonstrated inconsistent monitoring practices. Using qualitative methods, we aimed to explore barriers and aids to routine neuromuscular monitoring and consistent reversal practice.

METHODS

Focus group interviews were conducted to obtain insights into the thoughts and attitudes of individual anaesthetists, as well as the influence of colleagues and department culture. Interviews were conducted at five Danish and one US hospital. Data were analysed using template analysis.

RESULTS

Danish anaesthetists used objective neuromuscular monitoring when administering a non-depolarizing relaxant, but had challenges with calibrating the monitor and sometimes interpreting measurements. Residents from the US institution used subjective neuromuscular monitoring, objective neuromuscular monitoring was generally not available and most had not used it. Danish anaesthetists used neuromuscular monitoring to assess readiness for extubation, whereas US residents used subjective neuromuscular monitoring, clinical tests like 5-second head lift and ventilatory parameters. The residents described a lack of consensus between senior anaesthesiologists in reversal practice and monitoring use. Barriers to consistent and correct neuromuscular monitoring identified included unreliable equipment, time pressure, need for training, misconceptions about pharmacokinetics of neuromuscular blocking agents and residual block, lack of standards and guidelines and departmental culture.

CONCLUSION

Using qualitative methods, we found that though Danish anaesthetists generally apply objective neuromuscular monitoring routinely and residents at the US institution often apply subjective neuromuscular monitoring, barriers to consistent and correct use still exist.

摘要

背景

无论何时使用神经肌肉阻滞剂,都建议进行神经肌肉监测,但调查表明监测实践并不一致。我们采用定性方法,旨在探讨常规神经肌肉监测和一致逆转实践的障碍和辅助因素。

方法

在丹麦的五家和美国的一家医院进行焦点小组访谈,以了解个别麻醉师的想法和态度,以及同事和部门文化的影响。使用模板分析对数据进行分析。

结果

丹麦麻醉师在使用非去极化松弛剂时使用客观的神经肌肉监测,但在对监测仪进行校准和有时解释测量值方面存在挑战。来自美国机构的住院医师使用主观的神经肌肉监测,客观的神经肌肉监测通常不可用,大多数人没有使用过。丹麦麻醉师使用神经肌肉监测来评估拔管的准备情况,而美国住院医师使用主观的神经肌肉监测、5 秒抬头试验和通气参数等临床测试。住院医师描述了在逆转实践和监测使用方面资深麻醉师之间缺乏共识。确定的一致和正确使用神经肌肉监测的障碍包括设备不可靠、时间压力、培训需求、对神经肌肉阻滞剂药代动力学和残留阻滞的误解、缺乏标准和指南以及部门文化。

结论

采用定性方法,我们发现尽管丹麦麻醉师通常常规应用客观的神经肌肉监测,而美国机构的住院医师通常应用主观的神经肌肉监测,但仍存在一致和正确使用的障碍。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b236/7497053/14468dd37297/AAS-64-1089-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验