Suppr超能文献

泰国医生对小儿感染性休克的诊疗实践调查

Survey of Thai Physicians' Practice in Pediatric Septic Shock.

作者信息

Niamsanit Sirapoom, Saengthongpitag Teerapat, Uppala Rattapon, Sitthikarnkha Phanthila, Techasatian Leelawadee, Saengnipanthkul Suchaorn

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, 123 Mittraphap Road, Muang, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.

Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand.

出版信息

Children (Basel). 2024 May 15;11(5):597. doi: 10.3390/children11050597.

Abstract

(1) Background: Sepsis management in children is crucial, especially in emergency services. This study aims to evaluate Thai physicians' knowledge gaps in the emergency management of sepsis in children and to evaluate their adherence to the current sepsis clinical practice guidelines. (2) Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey of Thai physicians' management of septic shock in children. The survey was conducted through online questionnaires from March 2019-April 2019. (3) Results: Of the 366 responders, 362 (98.9%) were completed. Most of the responders were general practitioners (89.2%) and pediatricians (10.8%). The time from positive sepsis screening to being evaluated by physicians within 15 min was reported by 83.9%. The most common choice of fluid resuscitation was normal saline solution (77.3%). The practice of a fluid loading dose (20 mL/kg) consistent with the guidelines was 56.3%. The selection of the first vasoactive agent in warm shock (norepinephrine) and cold shock (epinephrine) according to recommendations in the guidelines was 74.3% and 36.2%, respectively. There was a significant difference between general practitioners and pediatricians in terms of knowledge about initial fluid resuscitation and the optimal vasoactive agent in cold shock (value < 0.001). In the multivariate model, factors associated with the guideline-based decision-making of vasoactive agent choice for cold shock were specialist training (pediatrician) and the completion of sepsis management training certification, with adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of 7.81 and 2.96, but working experience greater than ten years was inconsistent with the guideline-based decision-making (AOR 0.14). (4) Conclusions: Thai clinicians were unfamiliar with pediatric sepsis therapy standards, specifically the quantity of early fluid resuscitation and the appropriate vasoactive medications for cold shock. To encourage adherence to the guidelines, we propose a regularly required training course on pediatric sepsis management.

摘要

(1) 背景:儿童脓毒症的管理至关重要,尤其是在急诊服务中。本研究旨在评估泰国医生在儿童脓毒症急诊管理方面的知识差距,并评估他们对当前脓毒症临床实践指南的遵循情况。(2) 方法:这是一项关于泰国医生对儿童感染性休克管理的横断面调查。该调查于2019年3月至2019年4月通过在线问卷进行。(3) 结果:在366名应答者中,362名(98.9%)完成了调查。大多数应答者是全科医生(89.2%)和儿科医生(10.8%)。83.9%的应答者报告了从脓毒症筛查阳性到医生在15分钟内进行评估的时间。液体复苏最常用的选择是生理盐水(77.3%)。符合指南的液体负荷剂量(20 mL/kg)的实践率为56.3%。根据指南建议,暖休克中首选血管活性药物(去甲肾上腺素)和冷休克中首选血管活性药物(肾上腺素)的选择率分别为74.3%和36.2%。全科医生和儿科医生在初始液体复苏知识以及冷休克中最佳血管活性药物方面存在显著差异(值<0.001)。在多变量模型中,与基于指南选择冷休克血管活性药物决策相关的因素是专科培训(儿科医生)和完成脓毒症管理培训认证,调整后的优势比(AOR)分别为7.81和2.96,但工作经验超过十年与基于指南的决策不一致(AOR 0.14)。(4) 结论:泰国临床医生不熟悉儿童脓毒症治疗标准,特别是早期液体复苏量和冷休克时合适的血管活性药物。为鼓励遵循指南,我们建议定期开展儿童脓毒症管理的必修培训课程。

相似文献

1
Survey of Thai Physicians' Practice in Pediatric Septic Shock.
Children (Basel). 2024 May 15;11(5):597. doi: 10.3390/children11050597.
2
Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012.
Crit Care Med. 2013 Feb;41(2):580-637. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af.
3
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012.
Intensive Care Med. 2013 Feb;39(2):165-228. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8. Epub 2013 Jan 30.
5
Recognition and Management of Sepsis in Children: Practice Patterns in the Emergency Department.
J Emerg Med. 2015 Oct;49(4):391-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2015.03.012. Epub 2015 Jun 18.
7
Management of Pediatric Septic Shock and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Thailand: A Survey of Pediatricians.
Front Pediatr. 2022 Jan 12;9:792524. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.792524. eCollection 2021.
8
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.
Crit Care Med. 2008 Jan;36(1):296-327. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000298158.12101.41.
9
Thai-shock survey 2013: survey of shock management in Thailand.
J Med Assoc Thai. 2014 Jan;97 Suppl 1:S108-18.
10
Equipoise in Appropriate Initial Volume Resuscitation for Patients in Septic Shock With Heart Failure: Results of a Multicenter Clinician Survey.
J Intensive Care Med. 2020 Nov;35(11):1338-1345. doi: 10.1177/0885066619871247. Epub 2019 Aug 25.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

2
Descriptive statistics and risk factor analysis of children with community-acquired septic shock.
J Intensive Care. 2023 Feb 13;11(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s40560-023-00652-9.
4
Pediatric Severe Sepsis and Shock in Three Asian Countries: A Retrospective Study of Outcomes in Nine PICUs.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2021 Aug 1;22(8):713-721. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002680.
6
How Prepared Are Pediatric Residents for Pediatric Emergencies: Is Pediatric Advanced Life Support Certification Every 2 Years Adequate?
Glob Pediatr Health. 2019 Sep 16;6:2333794X19876809. doi: 10.1177/2333794X19876809. eCollection 2019.
7
Pediatric urgent care education: a survey-based needs assessment.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 14;19(1):388. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4241-8.
8
Epidemiology of Pediatric Septic Shock.
J Pediatr Intensive Care. 2019 Mar;8(1):3-10. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676634. Epub 2018 Dec 28.

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