静脉输液治疗中醋酸盐与乳酸盐缓冲晶体溶液的偏好和态度——一项国际调查。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller
{"title":"静脉输液治疗中醋酸盐与乳酸盐缓冲晶体溶液的偏好和态度——一项国际调查。","authors":"Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller","doi":"10.1111/aas.14553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions \"very often\" (76%) or \"often\" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":"69 1","pages":"e14553"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences and attitudes on acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions for intravenous fluid therapy-An international survey.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Louise Ellekjaer, Praleene Sivapalan, Sheila N Myatra, Lasse Grønningsæter, Johanna Hästbacka, Paul J Young, Andrew J Boyle, Marlies Ostermann, Carmen A Pfortmueller, Ieva Jovaišienė, Jan De Waele, Annika Reintam Blaser, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Ashish K Khanna, Yaseen M Arabi, Tomoko Fujii, Eric Keus, Mervyn Mer, Fayez Alshamsi, Maria Cronhjort, Anders Perner, Morten H Møller\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions \\\"very often\\\" (76%) or \\\"often\\\" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"e14553\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14553\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14553","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床实践指南建议在危重患者中使用缓冲晶体溶液,但不区分基于不同缓冲阴离子的溶液,即醋酸盐和乳酸盐缓冲溶液。因此,我们调查了相关医生对每种解决方案的偏好和态度。方法:我们对麻醉医师(围手术期护理)和重症监护病房(ICU)医生进行了一项国际在线调查。该调查包含13个问题,涉及受访者对使用醋酸盐和/或乳酸盐缓冲晶体溶液的态度和偏好,包括他们对比较这些溶液的潜在临床试验的意见以及此类试验的临床重要性。结果:共有1321名受访者参与,回复率为34%,来自18个国家的回复率从14%到96%不等。大多数被调查的医生报告使用缓冲晶体溶液“非常经常”(76%)或“经常”(16%)。醋酸盐和乳酸盐缓冲溶液的可用性各不相同,35%的受访者表示两种类型都可用,35%的受访者表示只有醋酸盐缓冲溶液,24%的受访者表示只有乳酸盐缓冲溶液可用。大多数受访者(87%)支持在成人急诊外科患者和ICU患者中进行随机试验,比较醋酸盐与乳酸盐缓冲晶体溶液。该问题的临床重要性的中位数评分为5(四分位数范围为4-6)。结论:在这项国际调查中,缓冲晶体溶液的使用率很高。不同解决方案的可用性差别很大。对潜在的随机试验的支持度很高,大多数受访者认为临床重要性是重要的,但不是关键的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preferences and attitudes on acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions for intravenous fluid therapy-An international survey.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines recommend use of buffered crystalloid solutions in critically ill patients but do not distinguish between solutions based on different buffering anions, that is, acetate- versus lactate-buffered solutions. We therefore surveyed relevant physicians about their preferences and attitudes toward each solution.

Methods: We conducted an international online survey of anesthesiologists (within perioperative care) and intensive care unit (ICU) physicians. The survey comprised 13 questions on respondents' attitudes and preferences regarding the use of acetate- and/or lactate-buffered crystalloid solutions, including their opinions on a potential clinical trial comparing these solutions and the clinical importance of such a trial.

Results: A total of 1321 respondents participated, with a response rate of 34%, ranging from 14% to 96% across 18 countries. Most surveyed physicians reported using buffered crystalloid solutions "very often" (76%) or "often" (16%). Availability of acetate- and lactate-buffered solutions varied, as 35% of respondents reported having both types available, 35% reported having only acetate-, and 24% reported having only lactate-buffered solutions available. Most respondents (87%) would support a randomized trial in adult emergency surgical patients and ICU patients comparing an acetate- versus lactate-buffered crystalloid solution. The median rating of the clinical importance of this question was 5 (interquartile range 4-6) on a scale from 1 to 9.

Conclusions: In this international survey, the reported use of buffered crystalloid solutions was high. Availability of the different solutions varied widely. The support for a potential randomized trial was high, with the clinical importance rated important but not critical by most respondents.

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
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信