Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Oxf Med Case Reports ; 2019(7): omz063, 2019 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31333851

RESUMO

Minimal data exist on the causes, incidence and management of giant bladder stones considering their rare occurrence. Only a handful of case reports have reported stones larger than 10 cm, and most of these cases are managed surgically. We present a case of a 56-year-old female who presented with vague, lower urinary tract symptoms who was later found to have severe post-renal acute kidney injury due to a giant bladder stone measuring 11 × 11 × 10.4 cm.

3.
J Hosp Med ; 12(4): 256-258, 2017 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28411298

RESUMO

The diagnosis of sepsis requires that objective criteria be met with a corresponding subjective suspicion of infection. We conducted a study to characterize the agreement between different providers' suspicion of infection and the correlation with patient outcomes using prospective data from a general medicine ward. Registered nurse (RN) suspicion of infection was collected every 12 hours and compared with medical doctor or advanced practice professional (MD/APP) suspicion, defined as an existing order for antibiotics or a new order for blood or urine cultures within the 12 hours before nursing screen time. During the study period, 1386 patients yielded 11,489 screens, 3744 (32.6%) of which met at least 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Infection was suspected by RN and MD/APP in 5.8% of cases, by RN only in 22.2%, by MD/APP only in 7.2%, and by neither provider in 64.7%. Overall agreement rate was 80.7% for suspicion of infection (κ = 0.11, P < 0.001). Progression to severe sepsis or shock was highest when both providers suspected infection in a SIRS-positive patient (17.7%), was substantially reduced with single-provider suspicion (6.0%), and was lowest when neither provider suspected infection (1.5%) (P < 0.001). Provider disagreement regarding suspected infection is common, with RNs suspecting infection more often, suggesting that a collaborative model for sepsis detection may improve timing and accuracy. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:256-258.


Assuntos
Avaliação em Enfermagem/estatística & dados numéricos , Sepse/diagnóstico , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos/etiologia , Enfermeiras e Enfermeiros/estatística & dados numéricos , Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Sepse/mortalidade
4.
Chest ; 151(4): 898-907, 2017 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27374948

RESUMO

Sepsis contributes to up to half of all deaths in hospitalized patients, and early interventions, such as appropriate antibiotics, have been shown to improve outcomes. Most research has focused on early identification and treatment of patients with sepsis in the ED and the ICU; however, many patients acquire sepsis on the general wards. The goal of this review is to discuss recent advances in the detection of sepsis in patients on the hospital wards. We discuss data highlighting the benefits and limitations of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria for screening patients with sepsis, such as its low specificity, as well as newly described scoring systems, including the proposed role of the quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score. Challenges specific to detecting sepsis on the wards are discussed, and future directions that use big data approaches and automated alert systems are highlighted.


Assuntos
Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas , Hospitalização , Sepse/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Escores de Disfunção Orgânica , Sepse/mortalidade , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Resposta Inflamatória Sistêmica/mortalidade
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA