4.6 Article

The impact of body position on intra-abdominal pressure measurement: A multicenter analysis

期刊

CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 2187-2190

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a021fa

关键词

intra-abdominal pressure; intra-abdominal hypertension; abdominal compartment syndrome; intravesicular pressure; intensive care; monitoring

资金

  1. Wolfe-Tory Medical

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality among the critically ill. IAP is most commonly measured using the intravesicular or bladder technique. The impact of changes in body position on the accuracy of IAP measurements, such as head of bed elevation to reduce the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia, remains unclear. Design: Prospective, cohort study. Setting: Twelve international intensive care units. Patients: One hundred thirty-two critically ill medical and surgical patients at risk for intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. Interventions: Triplicate intravesicular pressure measurements were performed at least 4 hours apart with the patient in the supine, 15 degrees, and 30 degrees head of bed elevated positions. The zero reference point was the mid-axillary line at the iliac crest. Measurements and Main Results. Mean IAP values at each head of bed position were significantly different (p < 0.0001). The bias between IAP(supine) and IAP(15)degrees was 1.5 mm Hg (1.3-1.7). The bias between IAP(supine) and IAP(30)degrees was 3.7 mm Hg (3.4-4.0). Conclusions: Head of bed elevation results in clinically significant increases in measured IAP. Consistent body positioning from one IAP measurement to the next is necessary to allow consistent trending of IAP for accurate clinical decision making. Studies that involve IAP measurements should describe the patient's body position so that these values may be properly interpreted. (Grit Care Med 2009; 37:2187-2190)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据