RESUMEN
Clinical simulation in Intensive Care Medicine is a crucial tool to strengthen patient safety. It focuses on the complexity of the Intensive Care Unit, where challenging clinical situations require rapid decision making and the use of invasive techniques that can increase the risk of errors and compromise safety. Clinical simulation, by mimicking clinical contexts, is presented as essential for developing technical and non-technical skills and enhancing teamwork in a safe environment, without harm to the patient. in situ simulation is a valuable approach to practice in realistic environments and to address latent security threats. Other simulation methods as virtual reality and tele-simulation are gaining more and more acceptance. Herein, we provide current data on the clinical utility of clinical simulation related to improved safety in the practice of techniques and procedures, as well as improvements of teamwork performance and outcomes. Finally, we propose the needs for future research.
RESUMEN
El primer Programa de Mentoría de SEMICYUC tiene como objetivo apoyar la carrera investigadora de los miembros más jóvenes de la Sociedad. Como beneficios añadidos está la adquisición de nuevas capacidades de investigación y/o clínicas, incrementar la capacidad de reflexión y fomentar el desarrollo de la próxima generación de líderes en la investigación. Este proyecto no sería posible sin el equipo excepcional de mentores o expertos investigadores dispuestos a emprender el viaje con los jóvenes aprendices. El presente artículo expone las bases de dicho programa, además de proponer futuros cambios en haz de una mejora continua (AU)
SEMICYUC's first Mentoring Programme aims to support the research careers of the Society's youngest members. Added benefits include acquiring new research and/or clinical skills, increasing the ability of critical thought, and fostering the development of the next generation of research leaders. This project would not be possible without the exceptional team of mentors or research experts willing to embark on the journey with the young trainees. This article sets out the foundations of such a programme and proposes future changes for continuous improvement (AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Mentores , Orientación Vocacional , Investigación , InvestigadoresRESUMEN
Objetivo. Evaluar la capacidad de procalcitonina (PCT), proteína C reactiva (PCR), interleucina-6 (IL-6) y proteína ligadora del lipopolisacárido (LBP), para discriminar entre sepsis y síndrome de respuesta inflamatoria sistémica (SIRS) de origen no infeccioso, y para predecir el riesgo de desarrollar shock séptico o muerte. Material y métodos. Estudio prospectivo de cohortes observacional. Población de 191 pacientes con SIRS (115 varones y 76 mujeres; edad media: 62±19). En todos ellos se analizó la concentración de PCR, PCT, IL-6 y LBP. Resultados. Sólo IL-6 y PCT son capaces de diferenciar entre SIRS y sepsis. El análisis de las curvas ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) nos muestra que las áreas bajo la curva (AUC) más significativas fueron las de la PCT, con valores de 0,703 para sepsis (p=0,0001), de 0,707 para shock séptico (p=0,0001) y de 0,682 para muerte (p=0,0001), seguidas de las AUC de la IL-6 para sepsis, shock séptico y muerte, con valores de 0,692 (p=0,0001), 0,617 (p=0,0155) y 0,613 (p=0,022), respectivamente. Las AUC de PCR fueron de 0,631 (p=0,014) para sepsis, de 0,574 (p=0,127) para shock séptico y de 0,576 (p=0,123) en el caso de muerte. La LBP presenta una AUC de 0,612 (p=0,03) para sepsis. Los puntos de corte obtenidos para cada biomarcador a partir de las curvas ROC fueron de 109pg/ml, 584pg/ml y 1.769pg/ml en el caso de IL-6; de 17mg/ml, 56,8mg/ml y 54,1mg/ml para LBP; de 17,4mg/dl, 11mg/dl y 10,7mg/dl para PCR, y de 0,55ng/ml, 0,98ng/ml y 2,36ng/ml en el caso de la PCT para sepsis, shock séptico y muerte, respectivamente. Conclusiones. Tanto la PCT como la IL-6 fueron marcadores biológicos fiables en la detección de sepsis en nuestra población de pacientes con SIRS. La PCT resultó ser el mejor marcador de mala evolución (shock séptico o muerte) (AU)
Objective. To analyze the capacity of procalcitonin (PCT), C reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP) to discriminate between sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) of non- infectious origin, and to predict the risk of developing septic shock or death. Material And Methods. Prospective cohorts observational study. Population of 191 patients with SIRS (115 men and 76 women; mean age 62±19). Blood levels of CRP, PCT, IL-6 and LBP were measured in all patients. Results. Only PCT and IL-6 were able to discriminate between SIRS and sepsis. The analysis of ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) curves show that the areas under the curve (AUC) were more significant in procalcitonin with values of 0.703 in the case of sepsis (P=0.0001), 0.707 for septic shock (P=0.0001) and 0.682 in case of death (P=0.0001), followed by the AUC of IL-6 for sepsis, septic shock and death with a value of 0.692 (P=0.0001), 0.617 (P=0.0155) and 0,613(P=0.022), respectively. The AUC of CRP were 0.631 (P=0.014) for sepsis, 0.574 (P=0.127) for septic shock and 0.576 with P=0.123 for death. LBP has an AUC of 0.612 (P=0.03) for sepsis. The cut points of each biomarker from the ROC curves were: 109pg/ml, 584pg/ml and 1769pg/ml for IL-6; 17mg/ml, 56.8mm/ml and 54.1mg/ml for LBP; 17.4mg/dl, 11mg/dl and 10.7mg/dl for CRP and 0.55ng/ml, 0.98ng/ml and 2.36ng/ml for PCT in the cases of sepsis, septic shock and death, respectively. Conclusion. Procalcitonin and interleukin 6 were good biological markers for the detection of sepsis in our population of patients with SIRS. PCT was the best biomarker of poor outcome (septic shock or death) (AU)