Prise en charge nutritionnelle préopératoire. [Preoperative nutritional support.]

Undernutrition is an independent factor of postoperative morbidity and mortality The aim of a preoperative nutritional support is to enhance immune muscular and cognitive functions, and to support wound healing This nutritional support (e g dietary management enteral or parenteral nutrition) should be limited to high risk situations with a beneficial effect of nutrition for the patient undernutrition major surgery and elderly Preoperative nutritional support should be scheduled for atleast 7 to 10 days before the surgery During the preoperative period the type and route of an eventual postoperative nutritional assistance should be anticipated In the case of emergency surgery nutritional assessment of the patient should be done as soon as possible before surgery or in the 48 h postoperative period Finally, in elective surgery, preoperative fasting should be limited to 2-3 hours for clear liquids and 6 hours for solids (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS

Support for Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Requirements among US Healthcare Personnel.

Objective. To measure support for seasonal influenza vaccination requirements among US healthcare personnel (HCP) and its associations with attitudes regarding influenza and influenza vaccination and self-reported coverage by existing vaccination requirements. Design. Between June 1 and June 30, 2010, we surveyed a sample of US HCP ([Formula: see text]) recruited using an existing probability-based online research panel of participants representing the US general population as a sampling frame. Setting. General community. Participants. Eligible HCP who (1) reported having worked as medical doctors, health technologists, healthcare support staff, or other health practitioners or who (2) reported having worked in hospitals, ambulatory care facilities, long-term care facilities, or other health-related settings. Methods. We analyzed support for seasonal influenza vaccination requirements for HCP using proportion estimation and multivariable probit models. Results. A total of 57.4% (95% confidence interval, 53.3%-61.5%) of US HCP agreed that HCP should be required to be vaccinated for seasonal influenza. Support for mandatory vaccination was statistically significantly higher among HCP who were subject to employer-based influenza vaccination requirements, who considered influenza to be a serious disease, and who agreed that influenza vaccine was safe and effective. Conclusions. A majority of HCP support influenza vaccination requirements. Moreover, providing HCP with information about the safety of influenza vaccination and communicating that immunization of HCP is a patient safety issue may be important for generating staff support for influenza vaccination requirements.

eKnowledge Project: Developing and piloting a forum tool to support the collaborative construction of knowledge on the UOC's Virtual Campus

Final report of the eKnowledge's project, an online forum tool that offers consultants and students the chance to create spaces for asynchronous communication and collaboration.

Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) improves the matching of diaphragmatic electrical activity and tidal volume in comparison to pressure support (PS) under non invasive ventilation

INTRODUCTION. Patient-ventilator asynchrony is a frequent issue in non invasivemechanical ventilation (NIV) and leaks at the patient-mask interface play a major role in itspathogenesis. NIV algorithms alleviate the deleterious impact of leaks and improve patient-ventilator interaction. Neurally adusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), a neurally triggered modethat avoids interferences between leaks and the usual pneumatic trigger, could further improvepatient-ventilator interaction in NIV patients.OBJECTIVES. To evaluate the feasibility ofNAVAin patients receiving a prophylactic postextubationNIV and to compare the respective impact ofPSVandNAVAwith and withoutNIValgorithm on patient-ventilator interaction.METHODS. Prospective study conducted in 16 beds adult critical care unit (ICU) in a tertiaryuniversity hospital. Over a 2 months period, were included 17 adult medical ICU patientsextubated for less than 2 h and in whom a prophylactic post-extubation NIV was indicated.Patients were randomly mechanically ventilated for 10 min with: PSV without NIV algorithm(PSV-NIV-), PSV with NIV algorithm (PSV-NIV+),NAVAwithout NIV algorithm (NAVANIV-)and NAVA with NIV algorithm (NAVA-NIV+). Breathing pattern descriptors, diaphragmelectrical activity, leaks volume, inspiratory trigger delay (Tdinsp), inspiratory time inexcess (Tiexcess) and the five main asynchronies were quantified. Asynchrony index (AI) andasynchrony index influenced by leaks (AIleaks) were computed.RESULTS. Peak inspiratory pressure and diaphragm electrical activity were similar in thefour conditions. With both PSV and NAVA, NIV algorithm significantly reduced the level ofleak (p\0.01). Tdinsp was not affected by NIV algorithm but was shorter in NAVA than inPSV (p\0.01). Tiexcess was shorter in NAVA and PSV-NIV+ than in PSV-NIV- (p\0.05).The prevalence of double triggering was significantly lower in PSV-NIV+ than in NAVANIV+.As compared to PSV,NAVAsignificantly reduced the prevalence of premature cyclingand late cycling while NIV algorithm did not influenced premature cycling. AI was not affectedby NIV algorithm but was significantly lower in NAVA than in PSV (p\0.05). AIleaks wasquasi null with NAVA and significantly lower than in PSV (p\0.05).CONCLUSIONS. NAVA is feasible in patients receiving a post-extubation prophylacticNIV. NAVA and NIV improve patient-ventilator synchrony in different manners. NAVANIV+offers the best patient-ventilator interaction. Clinical studies are required to assess thepotential clinical benefit of NAVA in patients receiving NIV.

Coulisses et tréteaux : à travers la jungle politique et littéraire. 2e série, Zo d'Axa, Gaston Couté, Georges Darien... / Victor Méric

Collection : Souvenirs et récits de notre temps

Decision-support tools to manage drug incompatibilities: evaluation by nurses

Introduction Preventing drug incompatibilities has a high impact onthe safety of drug therapy. Although there are no internationalguidelines to manage drug incompatibilities, different decision-supporttools such as handbooks, cross-tables and databases are available.In a previous study, two decision-support tools have been pre-selectedby pharmacists as fitting nurses' needs on the wards1. The objective ofthis study was to have these both tools evaluated by nurses todetermine which would be the most suitable for their daily practice.Materials & Methods Evaluated tools were:1. Cross-table of drug pairs (http://files.chuv.ch/internet-docs/pha/medicaments/pha_phatab_compatibilitessip.pdf)2. Colour-table (a colour for each drug according to the pH: red =acid; blue = basic; yellow = neutral; black = to be infused alone)2Tools were assessed by 48 nurses in 5 units (PICU, adult andgeriatric intensive care, surgery, onco-hematology) using a standardizedform1. The scientific accuracy of the tools was evaluated bydetermining the compatibility of five drugs pairs (rate of correctanswers according to the Trissel's Handbook on Injectable Drugs,chi-square test). Their ergonomics, design, reliability and applicabilitywere estimated using visual analogue scales (VAS 0-10; 0 =null, 10 = excellent). Results are expressed as the median and interquartilerange (IQR) for 25% and 75% (Wilcoxon rank sum test).Results The rate of correct answers was above 90% for both tools(cross-table 96.2% vs colour-table 92.5%, p[0.05).The ergonomics and the applicability were higher for the crosstable[7.1 (IQR25 4.0, IQR75 8.0) vs 5.0 (IQR25 2.7, IQR75 7.0), p =0.025 resp. 8.3 (IQR25 7.4, IQR75 9.2) vs 7.6 (IQR25 5.9, IQR75 8.8)p = 0.047].The design of the colour-table was judged better [4.6 (IQR25 2.9,IQR75 7.1) vs 7.1 (IQR25 5.4, IQR75 8.4) p = 0.002].No difference was observed in terms of reliability [7.3 (IQR25 6.5,IQR75 8.4) vs 6.7 (IQR25 5.0, IQR758.6) p[0.05].The cross-table was globally preferred by 65% of the nurses (27%colour-table, 8% undetermined) and 68% would like to have thisdecision-support tool available for their daily practice.Discussion & Conclusion Both tools showed the same accuracy toassess drug compatibility. In terms of ergonomics and applicabilitythe cross-table was better than the colour-table, and was preferred bythe nurses for their daily practice. The cross-table will be implementedin our hospital as decision-support tool to help nurses tomanage drug incompatibilities.