Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T11:21:28.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Can we demonstrate the efficacy of monitoring?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2008

D. Zygun*
Affiliation:
University of Calgary, Departments of Critical Care Medicine, Clinical Neurosciences and Community Health Sciences, Calgary, AB, Canada
*
Correspondence to: David Zygun, Foothills Medical Centre, Rm EG23, 1403-29 Street NW, Calgary, AB, Canada, T2N2T9. E-mail: david.zygun@calgaryhealthregion.ca; Tel: +1 403 944 1691; Fax: +1 403 283 9994
Get access

Summary

This article will discuss the challenges related to the demonstration of the efficacy of monitoring in an intensive care environment. It will address interpretation, therapeutic intervention, sample size and compare efficacy to effectiveness in the context of the developing field of neurocritical care.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Suarez, JI. Outcome in neurocritical care: advances in monitoring and treatment and effect of a specialized neurocritical care team. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: S232S238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Guyatt, GH, Sackett, DL, Cook, DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1993; 270: 25982601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Gnaegi, A, Feihl, F, Perret, C. Intensive care physicians' insufficient knowledge of right-heart catheterization at the bedside: time to act? Crit Care Med 1997; 25: 213220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Iberti, TJ, Daily, EK, Leibowitz, AB, Schecter, CB, Fischer, EP, Silverstein, JH. Assessment of critical care nurses’ knowledge of the pulmonary artery catheter. The Pulmonary Artery Catheter Study Group. Crit Care Med 1994; 22: 16741678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Iberti, TJ, Fischer, EP, Leibowitz, AB, Panacek, EA, Silverstein, JH, Albertson, TE. A multicenter study of physicians’ knowledge of the pulmonary artery catheter. Pulmonary Artery Catheter Study Group. JAMA 1990; 264: 29282932.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Williams, GW, Luders, HO, Brickner, A, Goormastic, M, Klass, DW. Interobserver variability in EEG interpretation. Neurology 1985; 35: 17141719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Leira, EC, Bertrand, ME, Hogan, RE et al. . Continuous or emergent EEG: can bedside caregivers recognize epileptiform discharges? Intensive Care Med 2004; 30: 207212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Guendling, K, Smielewski, P, Czosnyka, M et al. . Use of ICM+ software for on-line analysis of intracranial and arterial pressures in head-injured patients. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien) 2006; 96: 108113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Bulger, EM, Nathens, AB, Rivara, FP, Moore, M, MacKenzie, EJ, Jurkovich, GJ. Management of severe head injury: institutional variations in care and effect on outcome. Crit Care Med 2002; 30: 18701876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Eker, C, Asgeirsson, B, Grande, PO, Schalen, W, Nordstrom, CH. Improved outcome after severe head injury with a new therapy based on principles for brain volume regulation and preserved microcirculation. Crit Care Med 1998; 26: 18811886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Fakhry, SM, Trask, AL, Waller, MA, Watts, DD. Management of brain-injured patients by an evidence-based medicine protocol improves outcomes and decreases hospital charges. J Trauma 2004; 56: 492499; discussion 499–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Patel, HC, Menon, DK, Tebbs, S, Hawker, R, Hutchinson, PJ, Kirkpatrick, PJ. Specialist neurocritical care and outcome from head injury. Intensive Care Med 2002; 28: 547553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Rosner, MJ, Rosner, SD, Johnson, AH. Cerebral perfusion pressure: management protocol and clinical results. J Neurosurg 1995; 83: 949962.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Ng, I, Lew, TW, Yeo, TT et al. . Outcome of patients with traumatic brain injury managed on a standardised head injury protocol. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1998; 27: 332339.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Clifton, GL, Choi, SC, Miller, ER et al. . Intercenter variance in clinical trials of head trauma – experience of the National Acute Brain Injury Study: Hypothermia. J Neurosurg 2001; 95: 751755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Sandham, JD, Hull, RD, Brant, RF et al. . A randomized, controlled trial of the use of pulmonary-artery catheters in high-risk surgical patients. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Rotstein, D, Laupacis, A. Differences between systematic reviews and health technology assessments: a trade-off between the ideals of scientific rigor and the realities of policy making. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004; 20: 177183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed