床边超声心动图在危重患者护理中的应用——巴西医学协会、巴西急诊医学协会和巴西医疗医院协会的联合共识文件。第2部分-技术方面。

José Augusto Santos Pellegrini, Ciro Leite Mendes, Paulo César Gottardo, Khalil Feitosa, Josiane França John, Ana Cláudia Tonelli de Oliveira, Alexandre Jorge de Andrade Negri, Ana Burigo Grumann, Dalton de Souza Barros, Fátima Elizabeth Fonseca de Oliveira Negri, Gérson Luiz de Macedo, Júlio Leal Bandeira Neves, Márcio da Silveira Rodrigues, Marcio Fernando Spagnól, Marcus Antonio Ferez, Ricardo Ávila Chalhub, Ricardo Luiz Cordioli
{"title":"床边超声心动图在危重患者护理中的应用——巴西医学协会、巴西急诊医学协会和巴西医疗医院协会的联合共识文件。第2部分-技术方面。","authors":"José Augusto Santos Pellegrini,&nbsp;Ciro Leite Mendes,&nbsp;Paulo César Gottardo,&nbsp;Khalil Feitosa,&nbsp;Josiane França John,&nbsp;Ana Cláudia Tonelli de Oliveira,&nbsp;Alexandre Jorge de Andrade Negri,&nbsp;Ana Burigo Grumann,&nbsp;Dalton de Souza Barros,&nbsp;Fátima Elizabeth Fonseca de Oliveira Negri,&nbsp;Gérson Luiz de Macedo,&nbsp;Júlio Leal Bandeira Neves,&nbsp;Márcio da Silveira Rodrigues,&nbsp;Marcio Fernando Spagnól,&nbsp;Marcus Antonio Ferez,&nbsp;Ricardo Ávila Chalhub,&nbsp;Ricardo Luiz Cordioli","doi":"10.5935/2965-2774.20230310-en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Echocardiography in critically ill patients has become essential in the evaluation of patients in different settings, such as the hospital. However, unlike for other matters related to the care of these patients, there are still no recommendations from national medical societies on the subject. The objective of this document was to organize and make available expert consensus opinions that may help to better incorporate echocardiography in the evaluation of critically ill patients. Thus, the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, and the Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar formed a group of 17 physicians to formulate questions relevant to the topic and discuss the possibility of consensus for each of them. All questions were prepared using a five-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined a priori as at least 80% of the responses between one and two or between four and five. The consideration of the issues involved two rounds of voting and debate among all participants. The 27 questions prepared make up the present document and are divided into 4 major assessment areas: left ventricular function, right ventricular function, diagnosis of shock, and hemodynamics. At the end of the process, there were 17 positive (agreement) and 3 negative (disagreement) consensuses; another 7 questions remained without consensus. Although areas of uncertainty persist, this document brings together consensus opinions on several issues related to echocardiography in critically ill patients and may enhance its development in the national scenario.</p>","PeriodicalId":72721,"journal":{"name":"Critical care science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406406/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of bedside echocardiography in the care of critically ill patients - a joint consensus document of the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência and Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar. Part 2 - Technical aspects.\",\"authors\":\"José Augusto Santos Pellegrini,&nbsp;Ciro Leite Mendes,&nbsp;Paulo César Gottardo,&nbsp;Khalil Feitosa,&nbsp;Josiane França John,&nbsp;Ana Cláudia Tonelli de Oliveira,&nbsp;Alexandre Jorge de Andrade Negri,&nbsp;Ana Burigo Grumann,&nbsp;Dalton de Souza Barros,&nbsp;Fátima Elizabeth Fonseca de Oliveira Negri,&nbsp;Gérson Luiz de Macedo,&nbsp;Júlio Leal Bandeira Neves,&nbsp;Márcio da Silveira Rodrigues,&nbsp;Marcio Fernando Spagnól,&nbsp;Marcus Antonio Ferez,&nbsp;Ricardo Ávila Chalhub,&nbsp;Ricardo Luiz Cordioli\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/2965-2774.20230310-en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Echocardiography in critically ill patients has become essential in the evaluation of patients in different settings, such as the hospital. However, unlike for other matters related to the care of these patients, there are still no recommendations from national medical societies on the subject. The objective of this document was to organize and make available expert consensus opinions that may help to better incorporate echocardiography in the evaluation of critically ill patients. Thus, the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, and the Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar formed a group of 17 physicians to formulate questions relevant to the topic and discuss the possibility of consensus for each of them. All questions were prepared using a five-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined a priori as at least 80% of the responses between one and two or between four and five. The consideration of the issues involved two rounds of voting and debate among all participants. The 27 questions prepared make up the present document and are divided into 4 major assessment areas: left ventricular function, right ventricular function, diagnosis of shock, and hemodynamics. At the end of the process, there were 17 positive (agreement) and 3 negative (disagreement) consensuses; another 7 questions remained without consensus. Although areas of uncertainty persist, this document brings together consensus opinions on several issues related to echocardiography in critically ill patients and may enhance its development in the national scenario.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical care science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406406/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230310-en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230310-en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

危重患者的超声心动图在评估不同环境(如医院)中的患者时变得至关重要。然而,与照顾这些患者的其他事项不同,国家医学会仍然没有就这一问题提出建议。本文件的目的是组织并提供专家共识意见,这可能有助于更好地将超声心动图纳入危重患者的评估。因此,巴西医学协会、巴西急诊医学协会和巴西医疗医院协会组成了一个由17名医生组成的小组,提出与该主题相关的问题,并讨论每个医生达成共识的可能性。所有问题均采用Likert五分量表进行准备。共识被先验地定义为至少80%的回答在1到2之间或4到5之间。对这些问题的审议涉及两轮投票和所有与会者的辩论。编制的27个问题构成了本文件,分为4个主要评估领域:左心室功能、右心室功能、休克诊断和血液动力学。进程结束时,达成了17项积极(同意)和3项消极(不同意)共识;另有7个问题仍未达成共识。尽管不确定性领域仍然存在,但本文件汇集了与危重患者超声心动图相关的几个问题的一致意见,并可能促进其在全国范围内的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The use of bedside echocardiography in the care of critically ill patients - a joint consensus document of the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência and Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar. Part 2 - Technical aspects.

Echocardiography in critically ill patients has become essential in the evaluation of patients in different settings, such as the hospital. However, unlike for other matters related to the care of these patients, there are still no recommendations from national medical societies on the subject. The objective of this document was to organize and make available expert consensus opinions that may help to better incorporate echocardiography in the evaluation of critically ill patients. Thus, the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, and the Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar formed a group of 17 physicians to formulate questions relevant to the topic and discuss the possibility of consensus for each of them. All questions were prepared using a five-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined a priori as at least 80% of the responses between one and two or between four and five. The consideration of the issues involved two rounds of voting and debate among all participants. The 27 questions prepared make up the present document and are divided into 4 major assessment areas: left ventricular function, right ventricular function, diagnosis of shock, and hemodynamics. At the end of the process, there were 17 positive (agreement) and 3 negative (disagreement) consensuses; another 7 questions remained without consensus. Although areas of uncertainty persist, this document brings together consensus opinions on several issues related to echocardiography in critically ill patients and may enhance its development in the national scenario.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Association between hair cortisol concentration and acute stress symptoms in family members of critically ill patients: a cross-sectional study. Reply to: Factors associated with mortality in mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome due to COVID-19 evolution. Advancing insights in critical COVID-19: unraveling lymphopenia through propensity score matching - Findings from the Multicenter LYMPH-COVID Study. Daily Chlorhexidine Bath for Health Care Associated Infection Prevention (CLEAN-IT): protocol for a multicenter cluster randomized crossover open-label trial. Reply to: Neurocritical care management supported by multimodal brain monitoring after acute brain injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1