Suppr超能文献

能否在兽医领域使用应用程序来制定液体疗法计划?

Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?

机构信息

Sydney School of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

J Vet Intern Med. 2022 Nov;36(6):2079-2087. doi: 10.1111/jvim.16526. Epub 2022 Sep 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Formulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans.

OBJECTIVES

Compare conventional and app-guided fluid therapy plans for simulated cases of neonatal calf diarrhea.

PARTICIPANTS

Third and fourth year veterinary students (n = 55) from The University of Sydney.

METHODS

We developed a web app to assist fluid therapy formulation (http://calfaid.com) that was evaluated in a randomized case simulation trial. Participants were instructed to perform fluid therapy calculations and formulate an integrated fluid therapy plan for case scenarios using conventional methods and using the fluid therapy app. Responses were scored by a blinded study investigator using an a priori scoring guide and groups (conventional vs. app-guided) were compared using linear mixed models.

RESULTS

On average, total scores for app-guided fluid therapy calculations were 20.6% points higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.1-27.1) than calculations completed using the conventional method (88.2% vs. 67.5%, respectively). On average, total scores for app-guided integrated fluid therapy plans were 14.2% points higher (95% CI, 6.3-22.2; 65.8% vs. 51.2%). Eighty percent of respondents indicated they would prefer to use the app-guided method over the conventional method.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Our findings suggest that fluid therapy plans can be improved using apps.

摘要

背景

制定复杂的液体治疗方案可能既复杂又耗时。因此,缺乏经验、时间或信心的现场兽医可能会制定出不尽如人意的液体治疗方案。

目的

比较常规方法和应用程序指导的液体治疗方案在模拟新生犊牛腹泻病例中的效果。

参与者

来自悉尼大学的三、四年级兽医学生(n=55)。

方法

我们开发了一个网络应用程序来协助液体治疗方案的制定(http://calfaid.com),并在一项随机病例模拟试验中对其进行了评估。参与者被指示使用常规方法和液体治疗应用程序进行液体治疗计算,并为病例情况制定综合液体治疗方案。反应由一名盲法研究调查员使用事先制定的评分指南进行评分,并使用线性混合模型比较两组(常规组与应用程序指导组)。

结果

平均而言,应用程序指导的液体治疗计算总得分比使用常规方法高 20.6%(95%置信区间[CI],14.1-27.1)(分别为 88.2%和 67.5%)。平均而言,应用程序指导的综合液体治疗方案总得分高 14.2%(95%CI,6.3-22.2;65.8%和 51.2%)。80%的受访者表示他们更愿意使用应用程序指导方法而不是常规方法。

结论和临床意义

我们的研究结果表明,应用程序可以改进液体治疗方案。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0793/9708415/2e3f33be9bfd/JVIM-36-2079-g002.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验