Why the study?
Does functional hemodynamic monitoring using dynamic measures improve patient-centered outcomes in hemodynamically unstable patients compared to static measures?
Does functional hemodynamic monitoring using dynamic measures improve patient-centered outcomes in hemodynamically unstable patients compared to static measures?
Dynamic hemodynamic monitoring incorporated into protocolized cardiovascular management algorithms may improve outcomes and reduce costs in hemodynamically unstable patients.
May support protocolized dynamic monitoring in unstable patients; leaves open prospective RCT confirmation of outcome gains.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To assess the recent literature on effective use of information received from hemodynamic monitoring. RECENT FINDINGS: Dynamic hemodynamic measures are more effective in assessing cardiovascular status than static measures. In this review, we will focus on the application of hemodynamic monitoring to evaluate the effect of therapy. SUMMARY: A systematic approach to an effective resuscitation effort can be incorporated into a protocolized cardiovascular management algorithm, which, in turn, can improve patient-centered outcomes and the cost of healthcare systems, by faster and more effective response in order to diagnose and treat hemodynamically unstable patients both inside and outside of intensive care units.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hadian et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: