Kelsey D. Sack MD, PhD , Chandrashish Chakravarty MD , Juliana Carvalho Ferreira MD, PhD , Daniela Helena Machado Freitas MD , Chris McGrath MBBCh , Mark E. Mikkelsen MD , Matteo Di Nardo MD , Elisabeth Riviello MD, MPH , Michael Root MD , Jon A. Silversides MBBCh (Hons), PhD , Theogene Twagirumugabe MD, PhD , Doris Uwamahoro MD
{"title":"Critical Care ATLAS","authors":"Kelsey D. Sack MD, PhD , Chandrashish Chakravarty MD , Juliana Carvalho Ferreira MD, PhD , Daniela Helena Machado Freitas MD , Chris McGrath MBBCh , Mark E. Mikkelsen MD , Matteo Di Nardo MD , Elisabeth Riviello MD, MPH , Michael Root MD , Jon A. Silversides MBBCh (Hons), PhD , Theogene Twagirumugabe MD, PhD , Doris Uwamahoro MD","doi":"10.1016/j.chstcc.2023.100043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The practice of critical care depends not only on the particular patient population served, but also on the context in which critical care is provided, including culture and regional norms and resources. How clinicians interpret and implement new evidence or guideline recommendations is affected by their unique context. In 2023, the Early Restrictive or Liberal Fluid Management for Sepsis-Induced Hypotension (CLOVERS) trial was published. The CLOVERS trial included 1,563 patients and studied early vasopressor initiation vs liberal fluid initiation after an initial fluid bolus for patients with septic shock seeking treatment in the United States. No mortality difference was found between the two treatment arms. In this article, adult and pediatric critical care clinicians from the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, Rwanda, India, and Brazil describe how CLOVERS has impacted or will impact their practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93934,"journal":{"name":"CHEST critical care","volume":"2 1","pages":"Article 100043"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000436/pdfft?md5=3abd142c7c745714eea6d32274d2320b&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788423000436-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST critical care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000436","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The practice of critical care depends not only on the particular patient population served, but also on the context in which critical care is provided, including culture and regional norms and resources. How clinicians interpret and implement new evidence or guideline recommendations is affected by their unique context. In 2023, the Early Restrictive or Liberal Fluid Management for Sepsis-Induced Hypotension (CLOVERS) trial was published. The CLOVERS trial included 1,563 patients and studied early vasopressor initiation vs liberal fluid initiation after an initial fluid bolus for patients with septic shock seeking treatment in the United States. No mortality difference was found between the two treatment arms. In this article, adult and pediatric critical care clinicians from the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, Rwanda, India, and Brazil describe how CLOVERS has impacted or will impact their practice.