ArticleCritical care explorations2023
Physicians' Clinical Behavior During Fluid Evaluation Encounters.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We sought to identify factors affecting physicians' cognition and clinical behavior when evaluating patients that may need fluid therapy.
backgroundProponents of dynamic fluid responsiveness testing advocate measuring cardiac output or stroke volume after a maneuver to prove that further fluids will increase cardiac output. However, surveys suggest that fluid therapy in clinical practice is often given without prior responsiveness testing.
designThematic analysis of face-to-face structured interviews.
settingICUs and medical-surgical wards in acute care hospitals. SUBJECTS: Intensivists and hospitalist physicians.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsWe conducted 43 interviews with experienced physicians in 19 hospitals. Hospitalized patients with hypotension, tachycardia, oliguria, or elevated serum lactate are commonly seen by physicians who weigh the risks and benefits of more fluid therapy. Encounters are often with unfamiliar patients and evaluation and decisions are completed quickly without involving other physicians. Dynamic testing for fluid responsiveness is used much less often than static methods and fluid boluses are often ordered with no testing at all. This approach is rationalized by factors that discourage dynamic testing: unavailability of equipment, time to obtain test results, or lack of expertise in obtaining valid data. Two mental calculations are particularly influential: physicians' estimate of the base rate of fluid responsiveness (determined by physical examination, chart review, and previous responses to fluid boluses) and physicians' perception of patient harm if 500 or 1,000 mL fluid boluses are ordered. When the perception of harm is low, physicians use heuristics that rationalize skipping dynamic testing. LIMITATIONS: Geographic limitation to hospitals in Minnesota, United States.
conclusionsIf dynamic responsiveness testing is to be used more often in routine clinical practice, physicians must be more convinced of the benefits of dynamic testing, that they can obtain valid results quickly and believe that even small fluid boluses harm their patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.