Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1134_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Foreword
- •Foreword
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Pain
- •Agitation-Sedation
- •Delirium
- •Contributors
- •1: Pain, Agitation, Delirium, and Immobility in the ICU
- •Introduction
- •Research Background
- •Pain, Agitation, and Delirium Assessment Scales
- •Non-pharmacological Approaches
- •Early Mobility
- •Post-intensive Care Syndrome
- •References
- •2: Bedside Neurologic Monitoring
- •Introduction
- •Cerebral Physiology Overview
- •The Neurologic Exam
- •Systemic Hemodynamic and Metabolic Monitoring
- •Continuous Electroencephalography and Electrocorticography
- •Transcranial Doppler
- •Intracranial Pressure Monitoring
- •Cerebral Oxygenation
- •Cerebral Blood Flow
- •Cerebral Microdialysis
- •Jugular Bulb Oximetry
- •Cerebrovascular Pressure Reactivity Index (PRx)
- •Brain Temperature
- •Near-Infrared Spectroscopy
- •Evoked Potentials
- •References
- •3: Status Epilepticus
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology
- •Etiology
- •Pathophysiology
- •Neurochemical Changes
- •Physiological Changes
- •Diagnosis
- •Neurological and Physical Examination and History
- •Brain Imaging
- •Management
- •Antiepileptic Drugs in Convulsive SE
- •Antiepileptic Drugs in Nonconvulsive SE and Ictal-Interictal Patterns
- •Seizure Prophylaxis in Intracranial Pathologies
- •Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
- •Brain Tumors
- •Ischemic Stroke
- •Intracerebral Hemorrhage
- •Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (aSAH)
- •Case Example Explanation
- •References
- •4: Traumatic Brain Injury
- •Epidemiology
- •Neurologic Severity Score
- •Anatomic Location
- •Skull Fractures
- •Intracranial Lesions
- •Focal Intracranial Lesions
- •Intraparenchymal Hemorrhage
- •Subdural Hematoma
- •Epidural Hematoma
- •Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
- •Diffuse Intracranial Lesions
- •Diffuse Axonal Injury
- •Abdominal Decompression
- •Special Populations
- •Diffuse Axonal Injury
- •Management of Skull Fractures
- •Management of Concussion
- •Outcomes
- •Glasgow Outcomes Score (GOS)
- •Brain Death Exam/Determination
- •References
- •5: Care of the Spinal Cord-Injured Patient
- •Epidemiology
- •Clinical Assessment
- •Physical Exam
- •Imaging
- •Clearing the Cervical Spine
- •Intensive Care Management
- •Cardiovascular Complications
- •Respiratory Complications
- •Physiologic Respiratory Changes After Spinal Cord Injury
- •Concussion
- •Primary and Secondary Brain Injury
- •Evaluation
- •Physical Examination
- •Neurologic Examination
- •Imaging
- •CT Scan
- •CT Angiography
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Monitoring
- •Intracranial Pressure Monitoring
- •Internal ICP Monitoring
- •External ICP Monitoring
- •Brain Tissue Oxygen (PbtO2) Monitoring
- •Management
- •Medical Management
- •Pathophysiology of Cerebral Perfusion
- •Reduction of ICP
- •Hypertonic Saline
- •Mannitol
- •Hyperventilation
- •Elevation of the Head of the Bed
- •Optimization of Systemic Blood Pressure and Oxygenation
- •Pharmacologic Management of TBI
- •Seizure Prophylaxis
- •Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prophylaxis
- •Therapeutic Hypothermia
- •Nutrition
- •Surgical Management
- •Management of Hematomas
- •Decompressive Craniotomy/Craniectomy
- •Burr Holes/Emergency Craniostomy
- •Ventilator Management in Patients with SCI
- •Deep Venous Thrombosis and Venous Thromboembolism (VTE)
- •Glucocorticoid Use in Acute SCI
- •Nutrition and Glycemic Control
- •Ethics/End of Life
- •References
- •6: Nontraumatic Neurological Conditions
- •Major Ischemic Stroke Syndromes
- •General Management of Ischemic Stroke
- •Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Stroke
- •Basilar Strokes
- •Cerebellar Stroke
- •Cerebral Venous Thrombosis
- •Primary Intracerebral Hemorrhage
- •Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
- •Hypoxic and Anoxic Brain Injury
- •CNS Infections
- •Acute Bacterial Meningitis
- •Acute Encephalitis
- •Brain Abscesses
- •Malignant Brain Tumors
- •References
- •7: Hemodynamic Monitoring and Resuscitation
- •Introduction
- •Injury Stress and Fluid Loss
- •Measuring Hypovolemia
- •Invasive Blood Pressure Monitoring
- •Central Venous Pressure
- •Pulmonary Artery Occlusion Pressure
- •Dynamic Measures of Fluid Responsiveness
- •Esophageal Doppler
- •Pulse Pressure/Stroke Volume Variability (PPV/SVV)
- •Pulse Contour Cardiac Output
- •LiDCO
- •PiCCO
- •End-Expiratory Occlusion (EEO)
- •Passive Leg Raising
- •Echocardiography
- •The Current Role of Echocardiography in Critical Care
- •Ventricular Function
- •Assessments of Cardiac Output (CO)
- •Volume Status
- •Goal-Directed Resuscitation
- •Lactate and Lactate Clearance
- •Blood Transfusion
- •Current Status of Transfusion Therapy
- •References
- •8: Hemodynamic Monitoring in Surgical Critical Care
- •Introduction
- •Indirect Perfusion Measurement
- •Considerations: Auscultation/Manual Method
- •Considerations: Oscillometric/Automated Method
- •Gastric pH Monitoring
- •Considerations
- •Sublingual Capnography
- •Considerations
- •Central Venous Pressure Monitoring
- •Considerations
- •Pulmonary Catheter Monitoring
- •Considerations
- •Tissue Oxygenation
- •Tissue Oxygenation: VO2
- •Considerations
- •Tissue Oxygenation: Mixed Venous O2 Saturation (SvO2)
- •Considerations
- •Tissue Oxygenation: Central Venous O2 Saturation (ScvO2)
- •Direct Perfusion Measurement
- •Considerations
- •Direct Visualization Methods
- •Transthoracic Echocardiography
- •Image Acquisition
- •Examination Views
- •Image Interpretation
- •Considerations
- •Transesophageal Echocardiography
- •Image Acquisition and Interpretation
- •Considerations
- •References
- •9: Cardiovascular Emergencies
- •Introduction
- •Acute MI
- •Management: STEMI
- •Management: NSTEMI
- •Acute Pulmonary Embolism
- •Tamponade
- •Tension Pneumothorax
- •Aortic Dissection
- •Traumatic Aortic Injury
- •Mechanical Complications of MI: Ventricular Septal Defect and Free Wall Rupture
- •Mechanical Complications of MI: Left Ventricular Aneurysm
- •Mechanical Complications of MI: Papillary Muscle Rupture and Acute Mitral Regurgitation
- •Future Horizons: The Emerging Role of Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiovascular Emergencies
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Physiologic Basis of Therapy
- •The Circuit
- •Components
- •Patient Selection
- •Supporting Literature
- •Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure
- •Hypercarbic Respiratory Failure
- •Bridge-to-Lung Transplant
- •Cardiac Failure
- •Management of ECMO
- •Patient Management
- •Circuit Management
- •Multidisciplinary Team
- •Outcomes
- •Survival
- •Complications
- •Long-Term Outcomes
- •Future Applications
- •Conclusion
- •Additional Resources
- •References
- •11: Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Lung Protective Ventilation
- •Introduction
- •Approach to MV in ARDS
- •Alternate Approaches to MV
- •Nonventilatory Adjuncts to MV
- •Intraoperative MV: A Setup for Disaster?
- •Summary
- •References
- •12: Noninvasive Ventilation in the Perioperative Period
- •Introduction and Physiology
- •Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)
- •Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BPAP)
- •Rationale and Epidemiology
- •Equipment
- •Interface
- •Equipment Complications
- •Pressure Ulceration
- •Patient-Ventilator Dyssynchrony
- •Patient Selection
- •Early Recognition of NIV Failure
- •Protocol for Initiating NIV
- •Preoperative NIV
- •NIV for Pre-oxygenation During Anesthetic Induction
- •Postoperative NIV
- •Abdominal Surgery
- •Foregut Surgery
- •Thoracic Surgery
- •Injured Patients
- •Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- •Perioperative OSA Risk Assessment
- •Immunocompromised Patients
- •Post-extubation Respiratory Failure
- •Palliative NIV
- •References
- •13: Care of the Surgical ICU Patient with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Pulmonary Hypertension
- •Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
- •Overview and Epidemiology
- •Pathophysiology and Etiology
- •Initial Evaluation
- •Clinical Symptoms and Physical Exam
- •Indications for ICU Admission
- •Differential Diagnosis and Diagnostic Workup
- •Pharmacotherapeutic Management
- •Glucocorticoids
- •Bronchodilators
- •Antibiotics
- •Ventilatory Support
- •Airway Clearance Techniques
- •Oxygen
- •Noninvasive Ventilation
- •Mechanical Ventilation
- •Ventilator Weaning, Consideration of Tracheostomy, and Palliative Care
- •Pulmonary Hypertension
- •Pathophysiology of Right Ventricular Failure
- •Etiology and Prognosis
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Management Considerations
- •Clinical Monitoring
- •Preload Optimization
- •Afterload Optimization
- •Vasoactive Therapies
- •Rhythm Control
- •Oxygenation and Ventilatory Support
- •Advanced Therapies
- •Palliative Care and End of Life
- •Pre-, Peri-, and Postoperative Management Considerations
- •References
- •14: Diagnosis and Management of Acute Kidney Injury
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology of AKI
- •Causes of AKI
- •Early Recognition and Initial Management
- •Investigations
- •Subcellular Events: Current Theories
- •Supportive Care and Medical Management of Complications
- •Intravenous Fluids and Hemodynamic Support
- •Diuretics
- •Vasodilators and Other Pharmacologic Agents
- •Nutritional Support
- •Long-Term Follow-Up
- •References
- •15: Renal Replacement Therapy in the Critically Ill Surgical Patient
- •Introduction
- •Overview of Modalities
- •Hemodialysis (Diffusive Clearance)
- •Intermittent Hemodialysis
- •Continuous Modalities
- •Continuous Venovenous Hemodialysis (CVVHD)
- •Hybrid Therapy: SLED
- •Overview of Controversies
- •Dose
- •Mode
- •Timing
- •Clinical Considerations
- •Access
- •Anticoagulation
- •Special Considerations
- •Discontinuation of Therapy
- •Emerging Concepts
- •References
- •16: Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
- •Introduction
- •Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
- •Peptic Ulcer Disease (PUD)
- •Esophagitis
- •Stress-Related Mucosal Disease (SRMD)
- •Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome (ZES)
- •Vascular Lesions
- •Mallory-Weiss Tear
- •Tumors
- •Injury
- •Post-intervention and Postsurgical
- •Other
- •Guideline-Derived Recommendations
- •Variceal Hemorrhage
- •Hepatic Transplantation
- •Small Bowel Hemorrhage
- •Lower GI Hemorrhage (LGIH)
- •References
- •17: Critical Care Management of Severe Acute Pancreatitis
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology
- •Etiology
- •Diagnosis
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Laboratory Tests
- •Imaging Studies
- •Overall Diagnosis
- •Clinical Scoring Systems
- •Ranson’s Criteria
- •APACHE II
- •BISAPS
- •Computed Tomography Scoring Systems
- •Phases of Acute Pancreatitis
- •Organ Failure
- •Types of Acute Pancreatitis
- •Systemic and Local Complications
- •Predicting Severe Acute Pancreatitis
- •ICU Management
- •Management in the First 24–48 h
- •Initial Resuscitation
- •Volume of Resuscitation
- •Guidance of Resuscitation
- •Resuscitation Fluid Type
- •Vasopressor and Inotropic Support
- •Intra-abdominal Hypertension and Abdominal Compartment Syndrome
- •Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
- •Strategy for Management in the First 24 h
- •Management in the First Week
- •Nutritional Support
- •Enteral Nutrition
- •Location of Enteral Feeding
- •Antibiotics and Probiotics in the Prevention of Infected Necrosis
- •Prophylactic Antibiotics
- •Probiotics
- •The Role of Acute Endoscopic Therapy
- •Overall Management Strategy in the First Week
- •ICU Management After the First Week
- •Management of Sterile and Infected Necrosis
- •Utility of Fine Needle Aspiration
- •Antibiotic Therapy for Infected Necrosis
- •Interventional Treatment for Infected Necrosis
- •Disconnected Pancreatic Duct Syndrome and Pancreatic Fistula
- •Gastrointestinal Complications of Severe Acute Pancreatitis
- •Vascular Complications of Acute Pancreatitis
- •Portosplenomesenteric Venous Thrombosis
- •Hemorrhage and Pseudoaneurysm
- •Strategy for Management After the First Week
- •Summary
- •References
- •18: Hepatic Failure
- •Acute Liver Failure
- •Clinical Manifestations
- •Neurologic System
- •Respiratory System
- •Cardiovascular and Hematologic System
- •Gastrointestinal and Endocrine Systems
- •Renal System and Electrolytes
- •Infectious Disease
- •Other Systems
- •Workup and Initial Management
- •Management
- •Encephalopathy, Cerebral Edema, and Intracranial Hypertension
- •Respiratory Management
- •Cardiovascular and Hematologic Management
- •Gastrointestinal and Endocrine Management
- •Renal Management
- •Infectious
- •Acetaminophen Toxicity
- •Amatoxin Intoxication
- •Wilson’s Disease
- •Viral Hepatitis
- •Ischemic Hepatitis
- •Chronic Liver Disease
- •Clinical Manifestations
- •Nervous System
- •Respiratory System
- •Cardiovascular and Hematologic System
- •Gastrointestinal and Endocrine Systems
- •Renal System
- •Infectious Disease
- •Other Systems
- •Workup and Initial Management
- •Management
- •Encephalopathy
- •Ascites
- •Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis
- •Variceal Hemorrhage
- •Hepatorenal Syndrome
- •Liver Transplantation
- •Other Therapies
- •References
- •19: Abdominal Compartment Hypertension and Abdominal Compartment Syndrome
- •Introduction
- •Diagnosis: Physiologic Markers of ACS
- •Diagnosis: Measurement of Abdominal Pressure
- •Treatment
- •Management of the Open Abdomen
- •Closure of the Open Abdomen
- •References
- •20: Nutrition in the Surgical ICU Patient
- •Introduction
- •Nutrition Assessment
- •Energy and Protein Requirements
- •Preoperative Period
- •Route of Nutrition
- •Enteral Nutrition
- •Immunonutrition
- •EN Access
- •Protocolized Management of EN
- •EN in Complex Situations
- •New Anastomosis
- •Postoperative Ileus
- •Vasopressor Support
- •Traumatic Brain Injury
- •Temporary Abdominal Closure
- •Parenteral Nutrition
- •Oral Diet
- •Probiotics
- •References
- •21: Antibiotic Strategy and Stewardship
- •Preventing Resistance
- •Antibiotic Formulary Restriction
- •Antibiotic Cycling
- •Preventing Infection
- •General Control Measures
- •Handwashing and Barrier Precautions
- •Decolonization
- •Health-Care-Associated Infections
- •Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection
- •CAUTI
- •De-escalation
- •References
- •22: Sepsis, Severe Sepsis, and Septic Shock
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology
- •Risk Factors
- •Sepsis Syndromes
- •Quantifying Organ Dysfunction in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock
- •Biomarkers in Sepsis
- •Markers of Tissue Hypoperfusion
- •Treatment of Severe Sepsis, Septic Shock, and Organ Dysfunction
- •Early Goal-Directed Therapy
- •Fluid Resuscitation in Sepsis
- •Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring
- •Antimicrobial Therapy
- •Source Control
- •Damage Control in Intra-abdominal Sepsis
- •Cardiovascular Support
- •Corticosteroids
- •Transfusions
- •Coagulation Disorders in Septic Shock
- •Activated Protein C
- •Acute Kidney Injury and Septic Shock
- •ARDS and Sepsis
- •Neurologic Dysfunction in Severe Sepsis
- •Multi-organ Dysfunction Syndrome
- •References
- •23: Source Control and Supporting Therapeutics: Integrating Bacterial Invasion, Host Defense, and Clinical Interventions with Source Control Procedures
- •Introduction
- •Source Control
- •Changes in Source Control Procedures
- •Source Control and Clinical Trials
- •Source Control Issues Related to Pathogens
- •Bacterial Invasion and Multidrug-Resistant Organisms (MDRO)
- •Organism Virulence Factors
- •Source Control Issues Related to the Host
- •Metabolic Derangements
- •Plasma Volume Expansion
- •Organ Failure
- •Immunonutrition and Immunomodulation
- •Epigenetic Phenomena and Receptor-Ligand Interactions
- •References
- •24: Soft Tissue Infections
- •Introduction
- •Pathogenesis of SSTI
- •Non-necrotizing SSTI
- •Epidemiology
- •Treatment of Non-necrotizing SSTI
- •Non-necrotizing Cellulitis
- •Bite Wounds
- •Complicated Abscesses
- •Necrotizing SSTI
- •Epidemiology, Bacteriology, and Outcome of NSSTI
- •Therapeutic Considerations in NSSTI
- •Type 2 NSSTI
- •Type 3 NSSTI
- •Type 1 NSSTI
- •Diagnosis of NSSTI
- •Therapeutic Approach for NSSTI
- •Surgical Therapy for NSSTI
- •Antibiotic Therapy for NSSTI
- •Incisional Surgical Site Infections
- •Pathogenesis of SSI
- •Therapeutic Approach for SSI
- •References
- •25: Anemia in the Surgical ICU
- •Epidemiology of Anemia in the ICU
- •Pathophysiology
- •Oxygen Delivery and Consumption
- •Red Blood Cell Life Span and Regulation of Red Cell Mass
- •Mechanisms of Compensation
- •Mechanisms of Anemia in Critical Care
- •RBC Loss
- •Impaired Erythropoiesis: Reduced RBC Production and Shortened RBC Life Span
- •Iron Homeostasis and Hepcidin
- •Hemodilution
- •Management/Treatment of Anemia
- •Transfusion Indications in the ICU
- •Risks of Transfusions
- •TRALI
- •TACO
- •TRIM
- •Anemia After ICU Care
- •References
- •26: Coagulopathies and Anticoagulation
- •Introduction
- •Assessing the Coagulopathic Patient
- •Common Acquired and Medication-Induced Coagulopathies in the ICU
- •Liver Disease
- •Acute Traumatic Coagulopathy
- •Post Cardiopulmonary Bypass
- •Pregnancy
- •Antiphospholipid Syndrome
- •Heparin and LMWH
- •Warfarin
- •Novel Anticoagulants
- •Inherited Coagulopathies in the ICU
- •Von Willebrand Disease
- •Hemophilia A and B
- •Procoagulant Therapies
- •Anticoagulation Management in the ICU
- •VTE Chemoprophylaxis or Full Anticoagulation in Patients with Blunt Solid Organ Injury
- •VTE Chemoprophylaxis or Full Anticoagulation in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury
- •Atrial Fibrillation ATE Prevention
- •ICU Procedures in Patients with Coagulopathy and Therapeutic Anticoagulation
- •Mechanical Heart Valves
- •Pulmonary Embolism with an Absolute Contraindication to Anticoagulation
- •Presumed Pulmonary Embolism in a Patient with Hemodynamic Instability or Cardiac Arrest
- •Summary
- •References
- •27: Thrombocytopenia in the Surgical Intensive Care Unit
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Etiologies of Thrombocytopenia in the ICU
- •Decreased Production
- •Increased Destruction, Consumption, or Dilution of Platelets
- •Sepsis and Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation
- •Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT)
- •Other Drug-Induced Hemolytic-Thrombolytic Syndromes
- •Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP)
- •Thrombotic Microangiopathies (TMA)
- •Intravascular Hemolysis
- •Postsurgical Thrombocytopenia
- •Trauma-Induced Coagulopathy (TIC)
- •Sequestration
- •Evaluation of Thrombocytopenia
- •Treatment
- •References
- •28: Venous Thromboembolism in the Intensive Care Unit
- •Introduction
- •Incidence
- •Risk Factors and Risk Assessment
- •Prevention
- •Pharmacologic Prophylaxis
- •Mechanical Prophylaxis
- •Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters
- •Prescription and Administration Compliance
- •Diagnosis
- •Duplex Ultrasonography
- •Computed Tomography Angiography
- •Echocardiography
- •Other Diagnostic Modalities
- •Screening in Asymptomatic Patients
- •Treatment of DVT
- •Treatment of PE
- •Impact
- •References
- •29: Glycemic Control and Insulin Resistance
- •Overview of Evidence Supporting Strict Glucose Control in the ICU
- •Resolving the Differences Between Studies of Intensive Glucose Control
- •The Role of Hypoglycemia and Glucose Variability in ICU Mortality
- •What Is the Appropriate Target for Glucose Control?
- •Glucose Measurement in the ICU
- •Recent Technological Developments
- •References
- •30: Critical Illness-Related Corticosteroid Insufficiency in the Intensive Care Patient
- •Introduction
- •Physiology of the HPA Axis
- •The Systemic Effects of Cortisol
- •Cortisol Synthesis
- •Critical Illness
- •Diagnosing CIRCI
- •Cortisol Levels
- •ACTH Stimulation Tests
- •Evidence for Treatment
- •Therapy
- •Perioperative “Stress Dose” Steroids
- •Steroids in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
- •Summary
- •References
- •31: Thyroid Disorders
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology
- •Thyroid Storm
- •Pathophysiology
- •Precipitating Causes
- •Clinical Features and Diagnosis
- •Medical Treatment
- •Therapeutic Plasma Exchange
- •Thyroid Surgery
- •Thyroid Storm in Pregnancy
- •Long-Term Management of Hyperthyroidism
- •Outcomes of Thyroid Storm
- •Myxedema Coma
- •Clinical Features and Diagnosis
- •Treatment
- •Myxedema Coma in Pregnancy
- •References
- •32: Hyperadrenergic Crisis
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Signs and Symptoms by Organ System
- •Hypertension, Hypotension, and Shock
- •Cardiac
- •Pulmonary
- •Peripheral Vasculature
- •Gastrointestinal
- •Renal
- •Neurologic
- •Multiple Organ System Failure
- •Misdiagnosis
- •Pathogenesis
- •Pathophysiology
- •Precipitants
- •Diagnosis
- •Biochemical Diagnosis
- •Imaging
- •Management
- •Immediate Management
- •Medications
- •Hypotension and Circulatory Support
- •Timing of Surgery
- •Operative Management
- •Postoperative Care
- •References
- •33: Trauma
- •General Approach
- •Initial Assessment
- •Airway
- •Breathing
- •Circulation
- •Disability
- •Environment/Exposure
- •Early and Later Stages of ICU Care
- •Neurologic
- •Pulmonary
- •Cardiovascular
- •Renal/Electrolytes
- •Gastrointestinal/Nutrition
- •Hematology
- •Infectious Disease
- •Endocrine
- •Musculoskeletal
- •Tubes/Lines and Drains
- •Special Considerations
- •Damage Control Abdomen
- •Transport
- •ICU as an OR
- •Family Support/Interaction
- •End of Life/Gift of Life
- •References
- •34: Immunocompromised Patients
- •Introduction
- •Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
- •Overview of Infectious Risks and Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Chemotherapy, Radiation, and Stem Cell Transplant Recipients
- •Neutropenic Patients
- •Overview of Infectious Risks
- •Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients
- •Overview of Infectious Risks and Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Patients Receiving Chronic Corticosteroids
- •Overview of Infectious Risks
- •Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Patients Receiving TNF-α (Alpha) Inhibitor Therapy
- •Overview of Infectious Risks
- •Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Patients with HIV/AIDS
- •Overview of Infectious Risks and Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •Antiretroviral (ARV) Use in the ICU
- •Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B or C Infection
- •Overview of Infectious Risks
- •Initial Diagnostic Evaluation
- •Empiric Therapy
- •References
- •35: Transplantation
- •Introduction
- •Cardiovascular
- •Pulmonary
- •Assessment of Graft
- •Imaging
- •Renal
- •Central Nervous System
- •Infectious Disease
- •Immunosuppression
- •References
- •36: Intensive Care in Obstetrics
- •Introduction
- •Scope of the Problem
- •Maternal Morbidity and Mortality
- •Predictors of Mortality at Admission
- •Physiologic Changes in Obstetrics and Clinical Implications
- •Cardiovascular
- •Invasive Central Monitoring
- •Pulmonary
- •Hematologic
- •Renal
- •Gastrointestinal
- •Pathology in Pregnancy
- •Cardiac
- •Preeclampsia-Eclampsia
- •Hemorrhage
- •Amniotic Fluid Embolism
- •Trauma Management
- •Primary Survey
- •Secondary Survey
- •Perimortem Cesarean Section
- •Summary
- •References
- •37: The Pediatric Patient Cared for in the Adult ICU
- •Initial Resuscitation of the Pediatric Intensive Care Patient
- •Physiology of Shock
- •Broselow™ System
- •Pediatric Airway Management
- •Anatomic Considerations
- •Basic Airway Management
- •Advanced Airway Management
- •Endotracheal Intubation Considerations
- •Fluid Resuscitation
- •Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury
- •Pediatric Analgesia and Sedation
- •General Approach
- •Medication Dosing
- •ICU Procedural Considerations
- •Central Venous Access
- •Intraosseous Access
- •Arterial Access
- •Intubation
- •Tube Thoracostomy
- •Ultrasound
- •Indications for ECMO
- •Psychosocial Considerations in Pediatric Intensive Care
- •The Adult ICU Patient with Congenital Disease (Pediatric Disease)
- •Pulmonary Considerations
- •Cystic Fibrosis
- •Respiratory Complications
- •Gastrointestinal Complications
- •Cardiac Considerations
- •Congenital Heart Disease
- •Cardiac Arrhythmia
- •Heart Failure
- •Cardiopulmonary
- •Acute Kidney Injury
- •Hepatic Dysfunction
- •Hematologic
- •Neurologic Considerations
- •VP Shunt Complications
- •References
- •38: Organ Donor Management
- •History of Organ Donation
- •Identifying Potential Donors
- •Referral of Potential Donors
- •Team Management Approaches to Donation
- •Neurological Criteria for Determination of Death
- •Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death
- •Pathophysiology of Brain Death
- •Systemic Sequelae of Brain Death
- •Cardiovascular System
- •Pulmonary System
- •Renal System
- •Hepatic System
- •Coagulation and Thermoregulation Disorders
- •The Role of Protocols in Organ Donation
- •Aggressive Resuscitation of Potential Donors
- •Hemodynamic Monitoring
- •Aggressive Hemodynamic Management
- •The Role of Vasopressin
- •The Role of Thyroxine
- •The Role of Insulin
- •The Role of Steroids
- •Managing Potential Complications
- •Considerations During Organ Recovery
- •References
- •39: Biostatistics for the Intensivist: A Clinically Oriented Guide to Research Analysis and Interpretation
- •Introduction
- •The Basic Mechanics of a Research Study
- •Power and Sample Size
- •Type III Error
- •Bias
- •Study Types
- •Measures of Disease Association
- •Relative Risk
- •Odds Ratio
- •Statistical Testing
- •Statistical Testing and Types of Data: Discrete Variables
- •Statistical Testing with Discrete Variables
- •Statistical Testing and Types of Data: Continuous Variables
- •Continuous Data: Mean, Median, Mode, and Related Concepts
- •Continuous Data: Statistical Distributions
- •Continuous Data: Standard Deviation (σ) and Standard Error of the Mean (SEM)
- •Statistical Testing with Continuous Data
- •Evaluating Diagnostic Tests
- •Measuring Agreement
- •Survival Analysis
- •Brief Comment on Trends and Pattern Analysis
- •References
- •40: Administration
- •Introduction
- •Structure
- •Personnel
- •Guidelines
- •Quality Care
- •Costs
- •Communication
- •Role of the Surgeon
- •Leadership
- •Intensivist Compensation
- •Measuring Success
- •References
- •41: Practical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics
- •Introduction
- •Pharmacokinetics
- •Changes in Pharmacokinetics in Surgical ICU Patients
- •Pharmacodynamics
- •Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling
- •Drug Classes
- •Nondepolarizing Neuromuscular Blockers
- •Opiates
- •Sedatives
- •Anticoagulants
- •Proton Pump Inhibitors
- •Levetiracetam and Lacosamide
- •Therapeutic Drug Monitoring
- •References
- •42: Ethics and the ICU
- •Introduction
- •Withdrawing and Withholding
- •Futility
- •Advance Directives/POLST
- •Dialysis
- •Organ Donation
- •Suggested Reading
- •43: Disaster Management and Preparedness
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology of Disasters
- •Biological Agents
- •Routes of Exposure
- •Prophylaxis and Therapy
- •Chemical Agents
- •Nerve Agents
- •Vesicants
- •Hydrogen Cyanide
- •Pulmonary Agents
- •Riot Control Agents (Tear Gases or Lacrimators)
- •Radioactive Agents
- •Medical Effects of Ionizing Radiation
- •Treatment of Radiation Casualties
- •Decontamination
- •Principles of Disaster Response
- •Principle #1
- •Principle #2
- •Principle #3
- •Disaster Medical Response
- •Search and Rescue
- •Disaster Triage
- •Levels of Triage
- •Level 1: Field Triage
- •Level 2: Medical Triage
- •Level 3: Evacuation Triage
- •Triage Errors
- •Evacuation
- •Disaster Management Teams
- •Disaster Drills
- •Summary
- •References
- •44: Postoperative Complications Following Surgery Abroad
- •Introduction
- •Elective Surgery Abroad
- •An Unregulated Industry
- •Nosocomial and Travel-Related Postoperative Infection
- •Transplant Tourism
- •Cosmetic Surgery
- •Surgical Complications in the Context of Disaster Medicine
- •Surgical Infections in Disaster Response
- •Strategies in Patient Management
- •References
- •45: Post-intensive Care Syndrome (PICS)
- •Introduction
- •Physical Impairment
- •Physical Dysfunction
- •Pulmonary Dysfunction
- •Neuromuscular Dysfunction
- •ICU-Acquired Weakness
- •Critical Illness Polyneuropathy
- •Critical Illness Myopathy
- •Risk Factors

462
H.H. Hon et al.
medical research settings is some form of regression modeling with accompanying graphical output—a process that
may be relatively simple or highly complex depending on the
study objectives and types of data (e.g., normally distributed
versus skewed, correlated errors requiring time-series analysis with moving averages, linear versus nonlinear relationships, no adjustment versus adjustment for independent
variable, confounding, and/or interactional effects) [
Conclusion
67 ].
This chapter described some of the key terms and con-
cepts pertaining to research and statistical methodology,
including important factors to consider in designing a
study and/or analyzing the data. Interested readers should
consult sources listed in the reference section for addi-
tional information. In addition, there are numerous online
resources for readers who wish to pursue the topic
further.
References
1. Slee VN. Statistics infl uence medical practice. Mod Hosp.
1954;83(1):55–8.
2. Lancaster HO. Statistics and medical practice. Med J Aust.
1982;1(9):366.
3. Stawicki SP, et al. Fundamentals of patient safety in medicine &
surgery. 1st ed. New Delhi: Wolters Kluwer (India) Pvt. Ltd; 2015.
4. McCluskey A, Lalkhen AG. Statistics IV: interpreting the results of sta-
tistical tests. Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain. 2007;7(6):208–12.
5. Lieberman MD, Cunningham WA. Type I and Type II error con-
cerns in fMRI research: re-balancing the scale. Soc Cogn Affect
Neurosci. 2009;4(4):423–8.
6. Greenfi eld ML, Kuhn JE, Wojtys EM. A statistics primer. P values:
probability and clinical signifi cance. Am J Sports Med. 1996;
24(6):863–5.
7. Rosen BL, DeMaria AL. Statistical signifi cance vs. practical sig-
nifi cance: an exploration through health education. Am J Health
Edu. 2012;43(4):235–41.
8. Case LD, Ambrosius WT. Power and sample size. Methods Mol
Biol. 2007;404:377–408.
9. Freedman KB, Back S, Bernstein J. Sample size and statistical
power of randomised, controlled trials in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint
Surg Br. 2001;83(3):397–402.
10. Jaykaran PY, Kantharia ND. Reporting of sample size and power in
negative clinical trials published in Indian medical journals.
J Pharm Negat Results. 2011;2(2):87–90.
11. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd
ed. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988. p. 567.
12. Boxer PJ. Notes on Checkland’s soft systems methodology. 1994
[May 3, 2015]; Available from:
web/20091229162231/http://www.brl.com/pdfs/checklnd.pdf
13. GraphPad. What is the difference between Type I, Type II, and Type
III errors? 2015 [May 3, 2015]; Available from:
com/support/faqid/1080/
14. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology. 3rd ed.
Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins; 2008. p. 758. x.
15. Hill HA, Kleinbaum DG. Bias in observational studies.
Encyclopedia Biostatistics. 2005. 1.
.
http://web.archive.org/
.
http://graphpad.
16. Sica GT. Bias in research studies. Radiology. 2006;238(3):780–9.
17. Pannucci CJ, Wilkins EG. Identifying and avoiding bias in research.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(2):619–25.
18. Duffy SW, et al. Correcting for lead time and length bias in estimating the effect of screen detection on cancer survival. Am
J Epidemiol. 2008;168(1):98–104.
19. Hennessy S, et al. Factors infl uencing the optimal control-to-case ratio
in matched case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(2):195–7.
20. ResearchGate. What is the rationale for 1:2 ratio in case-control studies?
2015 [May 3, 2015]; Available from:
post/What_is_the_Rationale_for_12_ratio_in_Case_Control_studies
21. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do. Lancet. 2002;359(9301):145–9.
22. Zollinger RM, Ellison EH. Primary peptic ulcerations of the jejunum associated with islet cell tumors of the pancreas. Ann Surg.
1955;142(4):709–23; discussion, 724–8.
23. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. An overview of clinical research: the lay of
the land. Lancet. 2002;359(9300):57–61.
24. Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Cohort studies: marching towards outcomes. Lancet. 2002;359(9303):341–5.
25. Barton S. Which clinical studies provide the best evidence? The
best RCT still trumps the best observational study. BMJ.
2000;321(7256):255–6.
26. Ioannidis JP. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in
meta-analysis. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008;14(5):951–7.
27. McNutt LA, et al. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and
clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157(10):
940–3.
28. Wilber ST, Fu R. Risk ratios and odds ratios for common events in
cross-sectional and cohort studies. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(6):
649–51.
29. Stawicki SP. Guide to free statistical software: general applications.
OPUS 12 Sci. 2010;4(1):12–3.
30. Stawicki SP. Guide to statistical software: meta-analysis applications. OPUS 12 Sci. 2011;5(1):4–5.
31. Larson MG. Descriptive statistics and graphical displays.
Circulation. 2006;114(1):76–81.
32. Onchiri S. Conceptual model on application of chi-square test in
education and social sciences. Educ Res Rev. 2013;8(15):1231–41.
33. Balding DJ. A tutorial on statistical methods for population association studies. Nat Rev Genet. 2006;7(10):781–91.
34. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression, Wiley
series in probability and statistics texts and references section. 2nd
ed. New York: Wiley; 2000. p. 373. xii.
35. Stratford PW. The added value of confi dence intervals. Phys Ther.
2010;90(3):333–5.
36. McCluskey A, Lalkhen AG. Statistics II: central tendency and spread
of data. Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain. 2007;7(4):127–30.
37. Salmond S. Taking the mystery out of research: box and whisker
plots: displaying mean, interquartile range, and range. Orthop Nurs.
2007;26(1):33.
38. Wan X, et al. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation
from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):135.
39. Lyon A. Why are normal distributions normal? Br J Philos Sci.
2014;65(3):621–49.
40. Barde MP, Barde PJ. What to use to express the variability of data:
standard deviation or standard error of mean? Perspect Clin Res.
2012;3(3):113–6.
41. Curran-Everett D. Explorations in statistics: standard deviations
and standard errors. Adv Physiol Educ. 2008;32(3):203–8.
42. Sculco AD. Spine stats. The Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon-Mann
Whitney tests. Spine J. 2001;1(2):153.
43. Hollander M, Wolfe DA. Nonparametric statistical methods, Wiley
series in probability and statistics texts and references section. 2nd
ed. New York: Wiley; 1999. p. 787. xiv.
https://www.researchgate.net/
.

39 Biostatistics for the Intensivist: A Clinically Oriented Guide to Research Analysis and Interpretation
463
44. Lazic SE. Why we should use simpler models if the data allow this:
relevance for ANOVA designs in experimental biology. BMC
Physiol. 2008;8(1):16.
45. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Experimental designs using
ANOVA. Belmont: Thomson/Brooks/Cole; 2007. p. 724. xxi.
46. Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J. Statistics review 7: correlation and
regression. Crit Care. 2003;7(6):451–9.
47. Curran-Everett D. Explorations in statistics: regression. Adv
Physiol Educ. 2011;35(4):347–52.
48. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed.
Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon; 2007. p. 980. xxviii.
49. Curran-Everett D. Explorations in statistics: confi dence intervals.
Adv Physiol Educ. 2009;33(2):87–90.
50. Wikipedia. 68–95–99.7 rule. 2015 [May 3, 2015]; Available from:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68%E2%80%9395%E2%80%9399.7_rule
51. Parikh R, et al. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity
and predictive values. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008;56(1):
45–50.
52. Bruno P. The importance of diagnostic test parameters in the interpretation of clinical test fi ndings: the prone hip extension test as an
example. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2011;55(2):69–75.
53. Fawcett T. An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recog Lett.
2006;27(8):861–74.
54. Pett MA. Nonparametric statistics for health care research: statistics for small samples and unusual distributions. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications; 1997. p. 307.
55. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the
kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;37(5):360–3.
56. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for
categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159–74.
http://
.
57. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater
reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420–8.
58. Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J. Statistics review 12: survival analysis.
Crit Care. 2004;8(5):389–94.
59. UCLA. Supplemental notes to applied survival analysis: applied
survival analysis. 2015 [May 3, 2015]; Available from:
ats.ucla.edu/stat/examples/asa/test_proportionality.htm
60. Lee ET. Statistical methods for survival data analysis, Wiley series
in probability and mathematical statistics applied probability and
statistics. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 1992. p. 482. xii.
61. Conley EC, et al. Simultaneous trend analysis for evaluating outcomes in patient-centred health monitoring services. Health Care
Manag Sci. 2008;11(2):152–66.
62. Stawicki SP. Financial analysis techniques in clinical practice: from
‘micro’ to ‘macro’. OPUS 12 Sci. 2008;2(3):3–9.
63. Stawicki SP, et al. The glucogram: a new quantitative tool for glycemic analysis in the surgical intensive care unit. Int J Crit Illn Inj
Sci. 2011;1(1):5–12.
64. Stawicki SP. Application of fi nancial analysis techniques to clinical
laboratory data: a novel method of trend interpretation in the intensive care unit. OPUS 12 Sci. 2007;1(2):1–4.
65. Stawicki SP. Application of fi nancial analysis techniques to vital
sign data: a novel method of trend interpretation in the intensive
care unit. OPUS 12 Sci. 2007;1(1):14–6.
66. Pappada SM, et al. Evaluation of a model for glycemic prediction
in critically ill surgical patients. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e69475.
67. Rosenberg, D. U. S. Department of health & human services, division of science, education and analysis: trend analysis and interpretation. 1997; Available from:
pdfs/trendanaylsis.pdf
.
http://mchb.hrsa.gov/publications/
http://www.
.

Administration
Samuel A. Tisherman
4 0
Introduction
As medicine has advanced over the past 50 years, the need
for high-quality, cost-effective critical care services has
expanded exponentially. In the USA, one recent estimate
was that fi ve million patients are admitted to intensive care
units (ICUs) every year, leading to 23 million ICU bed days
[
1 ]. The cost of managing these patients typically accounts
for a large percentage of hospital costs.
The importance of high-quality care in ICUs cannot be
underestimated. Major complications often occur in the
ICU or lead to ICU admission. On the other hand, a strong
critical care service that prioritizes quality care can demonstrate a high level of patient safety and allow the hospital to meet quality standards set by third-party payers and
attract patients, who have now become more informed
consumers of healthcare. Also, providing excellent
critical care service can help attract and retain leading
surgeons.
Though critical care may be provided to patients anywhere, including outside the hospital, in the emergency
department, or in the operating room, this chapter
focuses on the provision of care within an adult, surgical
ICU, defined as a geographic space within the hospital
with the equipment and personnel to support or prevent
failing organ function in patients at high risk of death.
The discussion includes the unit structure, leadership,
personnel, development of policies and guidelines, performance and quality improvement, patient safety, and
costs. The basic principles should also apply to medical
and pediatric ICUs.
S. A. Tisherman , MD, FACS, FCCM
Surgical Intensive Care Unit , RA Cowley Shock
Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical Center ,
Baltimore , MD 21201 , USA
stisherman@umm.edu
e-mail:
Structure
The structure of ICUs varies depending upon the type of unit
(e.g., mixed medical/surgical, general surgical, or subspecialty surgical) and local culture and politics. ICUs typically
function as open or closed, depending upon which physicians are able to admit and discharge patients, as well as
write orders. In a purely open model, any physician has the
authority to admit and manage patients. In this model, there
tend to be multiple consultants, each managing a single
organ system. In contrast, in closed units, the intensivist
team completely manages the patients, streamlining care and
allowing for a more holistic approach to the patient. In semiopen units, the surgical team and the critical care team
comanage the patient, each having the authority to write
orders. The hospital may require intensivist consultation for
each patient admitted to this type of ICU. Surgical ICUs tend
to have a more open or semi-open structure, allowing the
surgical team to maintain signifi cant control of their patients’
care. Both closed and semi-open models are referred to as
“high-intensity” staffi ng. This model of care delivery is associated with improved mortality compared to a “low- intensity”
staffi ng model [
critical for the surgical team to remain closely involved in the
patient’s care. The surgeon best knows the details of the
operative intervention and the potential complications.
Nighttime, in-hospital intensivist coverage has been studied both retrospectively and prospectively. Wallace, et al.
found that nighttime coverage did not improve outcome with
high-intensity daytime coverage [ 3 ]. In contrast, however,
there were improved outcomes with low-intensity daytime
coverage. A subsequent, randomized, clinical trial of 24/7
staffi ng vs. daytime-only coverage with consultation at night
by telephone did not demonstrate any differences in length of
stay or mortality [ 4 ]. The recent Society of Critical Care
Medicine (SCCM) guideline on the delivery of critical care
recommended that high-intensity staffi ng “is an integral part
of effective care delivery in the ICU and can lead to improved
outcomes” [
2 ]. Even in a functionally closed unit, it is
5 ].
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016
N.D. Martin, L.J. Kaplan (eds.), Principles of Adult Surgical Critical Care, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33341-0_40
465

466
S.A. Tisherman
ICUs differ in their primary patient populations. Small
hospitals may have only one ICU that manages both medical
and surgical patients. At larger hospitals, in general, medical
ICUs accept only critically ill medical patients, and coronary
care units accept patients with acute coronary syndromes or
heart failure, though there may be some other medical subspecialty units. These hospitals may have one dedicated surgical ICU. With the increasing sub-specialization of surgical
services, however, large tertiary care hospitals or academic
medical centers may have a variety of subspecialty surgical
ICUs, including cardiothoracic, trauma, neurotrauma, and
transplant. Neurocritical care has become a bona fi de subspecialty of critical care. Depending upon the numbers of
patients and local politics, tertiary care hospitals may have a
dedicated neurosurgical, neurotrauma, neurologic, or neuroscience ICU.
Coverage of patients in subspecialty ICUs can also vary
among hospitals. In some systems, the management is service
based, e.g., the surgical ICU team follows all critically ill surgical patients, wherever they physically reside. The alternative strategy is that the critical care team manages all patients
that are physically in their ICU. The latter approach can lead
to managing “boarders,” e.g., a medical patient in a surgical
ICU. There is no clear evidence that boarders do any worse
than if they were housed in their designated ICUs.
If possible, surgical patients who require intensive care
should be taken directly from the operating room to the
ICU. This may not be possible if a bed is not immediately
available. In this situation, surgical patients may be taken to
the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) postoperatively.
Boarding patients in the PACU, in contrast to boarding them
in another ICU, thus delaying ICU admission, may adversely
affect mortality [
6 ].
Critical events frequently occur outside of the
ICU. Intensivists need to be involved in the development of a
rapid response system to quickly provide critical care wherever it is needed in the hospital and to transport the patient to
the appropriate ICU [
7 ]. In some systems, the intensivist
leads all responses. Other systems have a two-tiered system
in which ICU nurses or advanced practice providers (APPs)
initially assess the patient and then engage the intensivist
when necessary.
The role of telemedicine in the ICU continues to evolve [
8 ].
Advanced telemedicine systems combine the availability of an
intensivist and APPs with an electronic health record (EHR)
that provides real-time advice regarding best practices and
longitudinal data collection for performance improvement.
Such programs may be able to improve mortality and length of
stay, particularly with low-intensity intensivist coverage. But
even in academic medical centers with high-intensity intensivist staffi ng and in-house resident or fellow coverage, a telemedicine system may provide patient care benefi ts without
diminishing the educational value of the ICU for the trainees.
Personnel
What ultimately separates an ICU from a standard medical/
surgical ward in the hospital is the presence of a suffi cient
number of appropriately trained, highly specialized personnel working together to manage the most critically ill
patients. These personnel include physicians, nurses, patient
care technicians, respiratory therapists, and pharmacists.
Physical and occupational therapists, speech therapists,
social workers, and other administrative staff are critical to
the ICU mission.
In the high-intensity staffi ng model, the intensivist is
directly involved in the management of every patient in the
ICU either as the primary physician (closed model) or a
mandatory consultation (semi-open model). The ICU physician staffi ng standard of The Leapfrog Group [ 9 ] recom-
mends that physicians managing patients in the ICU should
be free from other responsibilities so that they can attend to
patients’ needs at any time. The optimal number of patients
covered by a single intensivist is unclear, but 15 or more may
be undesirable [ 10 ]. In addition to providing direct patient
care, the intensivists should be responsible for developing
diagnostic and therapeutic protocols, as well as admission
and discharge criteria.
At large medical centers, trainees from a variety of specialties, including surgery, anesthesiology, internal medicine, emergency medicine, and neurology, provide direct
patient care in the ICU. The staff intensivists are responsible
for supervising and teaching the trainees. As the trainees
progress through their training, they should have the opportunity to take on increasing responsibility.
As the need for critical care services have increased, concerns about a shortage of intensivists have been raised. Part
of the solution is encouraging trainees to choose a career in
critical care. Relatively new avenues to certifi cation for
emergency medicine physicians and neurologists have
helped. In addition, APPs have become key providers at the
bedside in ICUs. The number of intensivists, physician trainees, and APPs needed to run an ICU varies with the patient
population and acuity.
Bedside nurses are the ones who spend the most time
directly interacting with patients and implementing the plan
of care. They need to have specialized critical care training to
assure specifi c competencies needed for the specifi c patient
populations they care for. Nurse trainees are often involved
also. The number of nurses needed to provide appropriate
care in an ICU is dependent upon the number of beds in the
ICU and patient acuity. In the USA, the patient/nurse ratio is
typically 2:1. However, some patients require very frequent,
if not constant, attention, necessitating 1:1 staffi ng.
In the USA, certifi ed respiratory therapy technicians manage ventilators. This paradigm is much less common outside
the USA, where the physicians and nurses manage the

40 Administration
467
ventilators. In either system, it is critical that both physician
and nursing personnel in the ICU are trained to assist the
patients’ ventilation in case of an emergency, either by
adjusting the ventilator or using a self-infl ating bag.
Bioengineering staff is needed to maintain the advanced
monitors and devices that are used in the ICU. Administrative
staff to stock supplies, manage paperwork, and answer
phones can be invaluable for allowing the nursing staff to
focus on direct patient care needs.
Guidelines
Managing critically ill patients can be very complex. There
are multiple physicians, nurses, and allied healthcare team
members involved. To optimize patient care, everyone must
be “on the same page.” ICU leadership is responsible for the
development of policies (which refl ect institutional principles or values) and protocols (which are specifi c management tools). These should be developed based upon the best
evidence available.
Many national organizations have developed evidencebased guidelines for various aspects of the management of
critically ill patients (Table 40.1 ). Some are developed for
very specifi c diseases or procedures, e.g., guidelines for
management of specifi c injuries in trauma patients. Others
are more generic for critical illness, e.g., sepsis or mechanical ventilation.
Implementation of guidelines requires buy-in from all
members of the ICU team. Representatives from all key professions and disciplines should be involved from the beginning. Protocols developed just by physicians can readily fail
because nursing or respiratory therapy issues were not taken
into account, making implementation impossible.
Once policies and protocols are developed, the practitioners at the bedside need to be aware of them. Educational
programs should be developed so that they understand the
details of the protocol. The choice of format for education,
such as live in-services or web-based materials, depends
upon the type of material, institutional support, and number
of personnel to be trained. If possible, protocols, such as ventilator weaning protocols, should be embedded into electronic
order sets. Policies, such as indications for transfusion, can
be incorporated as prompts within the EHR. The EHR should
provide data for the ICU leadership regarding policy and
protocol compliance.
Quality Care
The goal of providing care to critically ill patients is to prevent or support major organ system dysfunction in order to
minimize morbidity and mortality. To accomplish this, the
critical care team needs data. Ideally, initiatives to improve
the quality of patient care should demonstrate improvement
in patient-centered outcomes, such as mortality, functional
recovery, or major morbidity. Over the years, attempts to
improve these types of outcomes have been fraught with
non-statistically signifi cant differences either between
groups or before and after an intervention is implemented.
Often it is just not practical or even possible to have enough
patients to demonstrate a difference. Similarly, when one
center seems to demonstrate a difference, replicating this
effect at other centers has been diffi cult.
Donabedian described three aspects to quality care: structure, process, and outcome [ 11 ]. Structure refers to the organi-
zation of critical care services within the ICU. Process refers
to how care is provided in the ICU. Outcomes refer to patient
outcomes. Local infrastructure and politics often make changing the structure of care diffi cult. Demonstrating improvements in outcome, as noted above, is also diffi cult. Therefore,
most projects focus on changing the process of care.
Process improvement projects have traditionally followed
the plan, do, study, act (PDSA) paradigm. Curtis et al. have
developed a more detailed guide to quality improvement
projects [ 12 ]. Some key elements emphasized in this guide
include (1) prioritizing projects based upon importance for
patient care, level of motivation, and feasibility; (2) preparing
for the project, including developing a plan and building support; (3) creating systems for collecting data and reporting it;
and (4) introducing strategies for changing clinician behavior. Once initiated, it is important to review the data, potentially modify the strategy, and, if successful, develop a
process for sustainability of the intervention.
Table 40.1 Resources for guidelines
Organization Website
Society of Critical Care Medicine
Chest
American Thoracic Society
Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma
Western Trauma Association
National Guideline Clearinghouse
http://www.learnicu.org/pages/guidelines.aspx
https://www.chestnet.org/Guidelines-and-Resources/Guidelines-and-Consensus-statements/
CHEST-guidelines
http://www.thoracic.org/professionals/clinical-resources/critical-care/
statements-and-guidelines/
http://www.east.org/education/practice-management-guidelines
http://westerntrauma.org/algorithms/algorithms.html
http://www.guideline.gov/

468
S.A. Tisherman
Adherence to a protocol or a national guideline is a common starting place for quality improvement that is both
doable and likely to improve the process of care and possibly
the outcomes of care.
Bedside checklists can readily improve the processes of
care [ 13 ]. Such a checklist could include spontaneous awak-
ening trial, spontaneous breathing trial, need for urinary
catheter, need for central venous catheters, deep venous
thrombosis prophylaxis, stress ulcer prophylaxis, etc.
Though demonstrating that an intervention clearly
improves outcomes is challenging and frustrating, we should
not stop trying. Over time, even without obvious breakthrough treatments, outcomes for critically ill patients have
been improving; the critical care system is doing something
right. Mortality and complication rates should be tracked.
Other straightforward outcomes to be followed include readmission to the ICU and unexpected extubations, particularly
those that result in re-intubation. A “softer” outcome that is
worthy of study is patient and/or family satisfaction with
their experience in the ICU.
Obtaining data on ICU processes and outcomes can be
challenging. If possible, the EHR should be able to generate
much of the data. Asking staff (either nurses or physicians)
to collect this data can be more problematic. All staff working in the ICU environment tend to be well motivated and
hardworking. But asking them to add the additional burden
of data collection may lead to pushback. On the other hand,
with the right leadership and establishment of a culture of
safety, it is possible to have clinicians’ help with some of this
data collection, as long as the workfl ow is as effi cient as
possible.
Outcomes for critically ill patients are dependent upon the
severity of the patients’ illness, as well as the processes of
care within the ICU. Outcome data needs to be risk adjusted
so that appropriate comparisons can be made between local
ICUs and regional or national norms.
Beyond working with ICU staff, quality improvement and
patient safety initiatives should be a high priority for hospital
administration. This is particularly true in the era of hospital
reimbursement based upon quality. For example, if the hospital stands to lose money if the frequency of healthcareassociated conditions reaches a certain threshold, then the
hospital needs to provide the resources to gather data on the
processes instituted to minimize these conditions.
Changing behaviors in the complex environment of the
ICU can be challenging. Input and buy-in from all parties
involved are critical. Some recommendations from the
SCCM guideline on critical care delivery include (1) fl ow
sheets posted in the ICU illustrating how new processes have
been incorporated into daily workfl ow, (2) formal protocols
for educating fl oat staff, (3) inclusion of new processes into
daily checklists completed during multidisciplinary rounds,
(4) the use of auditors, and (5) staff evaluations that report
how frequently staff comply with new processes [ 5 ].
Automatic triggers, such as via the EHR, and real-time feedback can help. Gurses et al. have developed a useful tool for
identifying and eliminating barriers to compliance [ 14 ]. The
tool involves assembling a multidisciplinary team, identifying barriers by observing the process and talking with staff,
summarizing barriers, prioritizing barriers based upon severity and likelihood of causing noncompliance, and developing
an action plan for each identifi ed barrier.
Costs
The provision of critical care services absorbs a huge amount
of hospital budgets. This can lead to tension between the
hospital and ICU leadership. The hospital will try to contain
costs. The ICU team wants to provide high-quality care,
which takes resources. Personnel constitute the largest portion of the costs for providing critical care services. It is critical to have suffi cient nursing staff and appropriate support
staff to provide quality care while maintaining a high level of
staff satisfaction and pride. When the staff feels overworked
or undervalued, they will look elsewhere for employment,
adding additional burdens on those left behind, who in turn
become disgruntled. The ICU leadership needs to keep team
morale as a high priority when negotiating staffi ng with hospital administration.
Other large components of ICU costs include laboratory
tests, imaging studies, and medications, which the intensivist
can, in part, control. It seems simple to suggest that the intensivist should only order laboratory or imaging tests that are
clearly indicated, rather than ordering a series of tests on a
daily basis. One part of the solution is to develop order sets
that include only the minimum number of labs and imaging
studies needed to safely manage a particular patient population. Another part of the strategy is to have the ordering of
lab tests and imaging studies become a routine topic of discussion on rounds. Though intensivists can individually help
control the use of expensive medications, the hospital pharmacy service (through the Pharmacy and Therapeutics
Committee) has the ability to more directly limit certain
medication use. Ideally, intensivists and pharmacists should
work together to defi ne appropriate indications for medication use based upon the best available literature. This can
result in a range of approaches, from pop-ups in the EHR to
direct control of the use of a certain medications by
gatekeepers.
From the hospital perspective, there is a strong incentive
to minimize the number of ICU days per patient since reimbursement from third-party payers is usually based upon the
patient’s Diagnosis Related Group, not per diem charges.
From the perspective of optimizing care, transferring patients
who need intensive care into the ICU should occur as rapidly

40 Administration
469
as possible. On the fl ip side, transferring appropriate patients
out of the ICU should also be effi cient. Yet, there are often
downstream bottlenecks created by an inadequate number of
intermediate care or telemetry beds. The ICU leadership
needs to be able to present data to the hospital administration
regarding how these delayed transfers affect ICU throughput
and, ultimately, could lead to delayed transfers from outside
hospitals, boarding of patients in the PACU, or even delay/
cancelation of operative procedures.
Communication
Critically ill surgical patients typically have a number of physicians involved in their care, including the intensivist, the operating surgeon, and consultants. In addition, nurses, respiratory
therapists, pharmacists, physical and occupational therapists,
and others are involved. From the patient and family perspective, it is very helpful for a member of the team to explain
everyone’s role when the patient is admitted to the ICU.
Good communication among all these individuals is critical for providing high-quality care. Well-structured, multidisciplinary rounds go a long way toward setting the stage
for communication. It is important for the intensivist to facilitate discussion on rounds so that all members of the team
have input and feel engaged in the patient’s plan of care.
Using a checklist or goal sheet can help assure that the plan
is clear to everyone and that small details are not missed.
During afternoon or evening rounds, the goal sheet should be
reviewed. If an item has not been accomplished, there should
be documentation of why not.
Transitions of care, such as from the operating room to the
ICU or from the ICU to a regular hospital fl oor, are points in
time when various aspects of the patient’s care may get lost.
Development of handoff sheets and a structured reporting system can help assure that the continuum of care is maintained.
Role of the Surgeon
Whether or not the ICU is structured as a closed, semi-open,
or open unit, the involvement of the operating surgeon is
critical. It behooves the intensivist to be sure that the attending surgeon is involved in any major decisions affecting the
patient’s management. The surgeon best knows the operative
fi ndings, anticipated postoperative course, and potential
complications. The surgeon has also developed a close rapport with the patient and the patient’s family prior to the
operation. Communication between the ICU and surgical
teams needs to be open and collegial, both when the patient
is doing well and when unexpected complications arise. If
possible, developing protocols jointly can help keep everyone “on the same page.”
The relationship between the surgeon and the intensivist
can sometimes become contentious, particularly for the nonsurgeon intensivist, when they have differing opinions regarding prognosis and end-of-life decision-making [ 15 ]. The
surgeon may focus on defeating death, while the intensivist
may focus on survival with good quality of life. Surgeons perform often complex and high-risk operations with the intent of
curing the patient’s underlying disease and achieving survival
with a good quality of life. This has been described as the
“covenant to cure.” Because they have directly operated upon
the patient, they feel a sense of responsibility and ownership
that is different than that of the non-surgeons involved in the
patient’s care. As a consequence, they may not readily relinquish all or part of the responsibility for the patient’s care to
the intensivist. They also may feel a sense that their patients
are somehow different than the typical patient studied in the
ICU, such that general ICU or hospital protocols for administration of blood products or various medications do not apply.
Discussion and education separated from the management of
an individual patient can help, as can jointly developed protocols. Emotions can cloud judgment when discussing the care
of a single patient.
Intensivists also want the patient to do well and have a
good quality of life after ICU care. But intensivists tend to
have a more holistic view of the patient’s status, taking relief
of pain and suffering into account.
When clear differences of opinion regarding prognosis
exist, there is no easy way to come to consensus. Direct communication is always the best place to start. It is unfair to a
family to ask them to make a decision regarding care of their
loved one when the physicians involved cannot even agree
on what to expect. That is not to say that medical uncertainty
should not be part of the discussion with the family. It should.
But giving them divergent messages only adds confusion.
When there are differences of opinion between members of
the healthcare team or between the healthcare team and the
family, it can be helpful to engage the palliative medicine or
supportive care service. These consultants, who are not
expert in the medical issues involved and have no direct
involvement in the patient’s medical care, can help facilitate
constructive conversations within the healthcare team and
between the team and the patient’s family. Although the discussion is often around continuing the “full court press” or
shifting to comfort measures only, a middle ground of a
time-limited trial of ongoing aggressive care is sometimes
more palatable to everyone involved.
Leadership
Ideal functioning of the complex environment in the ICU
requires excellent leadership, both medical and nursing.
Leaders need to serve as role models for their staffs and

470
S.A. Tisherman
trainees. In addition, the leaders need to be excellent communicators. They need to listen to the concerns of their staff,
as well as the concerns of the surgical teams. They also need
to be very good at managing confl ict. Keeping everyone
focused on doing the right thing for the patient usually goes
a long way.
Among intensivists, there may be signifi cant variability in
practice. The use of national guidelines can help the group
come to consensus [
16 ]. But much of the care delivered in
the ICU is not covered by guidelines or randomized clinical
trials. This does not preclude the development of local guidelines and protocols to provide more uniform care.
Development of these guidelines in conjunction with other
stakeholders, such as the nursing staff, pharmacy staff, and
surgical services, will help.
For an ICU team to function well, it is critical that the
medical and nursing leadership support each other. This synergy can enhance the quality of care and relationships with
the surgical teams. All staff needs to be held accountable for
their roles in providing quality care.
It is important for the medical leadership of ICUs to have
a multi-professional forum for discussion of data on the
quality of care for patients in the ICUs, quality improvement
projects, and share best practices.
Leadership, both medical and nursing, needs to nurture
the career development of members of the staff. This may
involve modeling appropriate behaviors and communication
skills, mentoring clinical skills and academic projects, and
supporting career advancement, even when that means having a valued team member leave the ICU for a higher position in their profession.
The ideal functioning of an ICU requires a number of
people in leadership positions that answer to the medical
director and nurse manager. There may be several important
committees, including process improvement, education, and
equipment/resources. A social (or “retention”) committee
can serve an important role in developing team camaraderie.
The leaders of these committees should be appropriately
mentored for their current and future leadership roles.
Intensivist Compensation
Intensivist staffi ng for an ICU has a signifi cant impact on compensation. Staffi ng can become complex because the size of an
ICU and the average census of the ICU are not designed around
the intensivist workload. The optimal number of patients for an
intensivist to manage on a daily basis is diffi cult to defi ne.
Within the pulmonary critical care medicine community, one
survey suggested concerns about the quality of care if one intensivist needed to manage 15 or more patients [ 10 ]. If an ICU has
ten beds, can an intensivist generate suffi cient billing to justify
appropriate salary support? As the size of the ICU increases
beyond 15, the covering intensivist may become increasingly
stressed. At what size of unit is it viable to have two intensivists?
How readily do residents and fellows allow intensivists to cover
more patients? Advanced practice providers may also allow a
single intensivist to cover more patients. In addition, they can
bill independently, though they typically are reimbursed at 85 %
of that of the physician. If the APPs are part of the same billing
unit or practice corporation as the intensivist and they capture
billing that would otherwise have been lost, their reimbursement
can help with the group’s fi nancial viability.
Like other hospital-based specialists, intensivists have
little control over the number of patients they see on a daily
basis. Clinical income for intensivists is usually limited by
the number of patients in the ICU. Efforts to optimize this
billing within the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services guidelines for critical care billing are worthwhile.
The use of critical care codes (e.g., 99291 and 99292) is
reimbursed at a signifi cantly higher level than the subsequent
hospital visit codes (e.g., 99231–99233). Intensivists need to
learn the nuances of critical care documentation and coding
in order to appropriately maximize billing. In addition, all
procedures, such as intubation, bronchoscopy, and central
venous catheter placement that are not bundled within the
critical care codes, should be captured.
Some critical care groups have taken on responsibility for
patients outside the ICU. This may take the form of participation in rapid response systems or a critical care consultation service. These initiatives can add to practice income,
though the more important impact may be on the quality of
patient care outside the ICU, helping to decrease the need for
ICU transfer and for readmission.
Compensation for availability is important for an intensivist group to negotiate with the hospital [ 17 ]. Whether this
availability is from home or in the hospital at night, it benefi ts the hospital in terms of quality patient care. Therefore,
the hospital should fi nancially support the group for providing this service.
Incentive plans within private practice or academic groups
vary considerably. Some offer “carrots” for compliance with
regulatory paperwork, quality improvement initiatives, education, or research. Such an approach encourages individuals
to go “above and beyond” the minimal workload and can
increase the quality and quantity of scholarly activities.
Others use a “stick” approach, e.g., placing a certain percentage of salary at risk for failure to comply with various
requirements or not participating in various activities.
Effective ICU leaders are able to demonstrate the value of
critical care services to the hospital [ 17 ]. Providing quality
care can decrease complications, readmissions, and length of
stay. In addition, because critical care costs are such a large
part of the hospital’s budget, critical care teams have the
potential for providing considerable savings to the hospital
by limiting the use of expensive therapies to patients who

40 Administration
471
would most benefi t from them and decreasing unnecessary
lab and imaging tests. In some circumstances, the savings
can be substantial, giving the intensivists an opportunity to
ask the administration for a percentage of those savings.
Measuring Success
The success of an ICU team can be measured in a variety of
ways. Patients’ clinical outcomes may be the most important,
but, as discussed above, improving outcomes via changes in
the process of care can be diffi cult to demonstrate. On the
other hand, successfully following protocols and other processes of care is a valuable measure of success. Other parameters include patient/family satisfaction and respect of the
surgical services. Finally, retention of high- quality, dedicated
staff is a sign of successful ICU structure and leadership.
References
1. Halpern NA, Pastores SM, Oropello JM, et al. Critical care medicine in the United States: addressing the intensivist shortage and
image of the specialty. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:2754–61.
2. Wilcox ME, Chong CAKY, Niven DJ, et al. Do intensivist staffi ng
patterns infl uence hospital mortality following ICU admission? A
systematic review and meta-analyses. Crit Care Med.
2013;41:2253–74.
3. Wallace DJ, Angus DC, Barnato AE, et al. Nighttime intensivist
staffi ng and mortality among critically ill patients. N Engl J Med.
2012;366:2093–101.
4. Kerlin MP, Small DS, Cooney E, et al. A randomized trial of nighttime physician staffi ng in an intensive care unit. N Engl J Med.
2013;368:2201–9.
5. Weled BJ, Adzhigirey LA, Hodgman TM, et al. Critical care
delivery: the importance of process of care and ICU structure to
improved outcomes. An update from the American College of
Critical Care Medicine Task Force on Models of Critical Care. Crit
Care Med. 2015;43(7):1520–5.
6. Bing-Hua YU. Delayed admission to intensive care unit for critically surgical patients is associated with increased mortality. Am
J Surg. 2014;208:268–74.
7. Jones DA, DeVita MA, Bellomo R. Rapid-response teams. N Engl
J Med. 2011;365:139–46.
8. Lilly CM, Zubrow MT, Kempner KM, et al. Critical care telemedicine: evolution and state of the art. Crit Care Med. 2014;42:
2429–36.
http://www.leapfroggroup.org/media/file/FactSheet_IPS.pdf .
9 .
Accessed 11 July 2015.
10. Ward NS, Afessa B, Kleinpell R, et al. Intensivist/patient ratios in
closed ICUs: a statement from the Society of Critical Care Medicine
Taskforce on ICU Staffi ng. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:638–45.
11. Donabedian A. Continuity and change in the quest for quality. Clin
Perform Qual Health Care. 1993;1:9–16.
12. Curtis JR, Cook DJ, Wall RJ, et al. Intensive care unit quality
improvement: a “how-to” guide for the interdisciplinary team. Crit
Care Med. 2006;34:211–8.
13. Byrnes MC, Schuerer DJ, Schallom ME, et al. Implementation of a
mandatory checklist of protocols and objectives improves compliance with a wide range of evidence-based intensive care unit practices. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:2775–81.
14. Gurses AP, Murphy DJ, Martinez EA, et al. A practical tool to identify and eliminate barriers to compliance with evidence-based
guidelines. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2009;35:526–32. 485.
15. Penkoske PA, Buchman TG. The relationship between the surgeon
and the intensivist in the surgical intensive care unit. Surg Clin N
Am. 2006;86:1351–7.
16. St Andre A. The formation, elements of success, and challenges in
managing a critical care program (Part I). Crit Care Med.
2015;43(4):874–9.
17. St Andre A. The formation, elements of success, and challenges in
managing a critical care program (Part II). Crit Care Med. 2015;
43(5):1096–101.

Practical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics
Anthony T. Gerlach and Lina Saliba
41
Abbreviations
α Distribution half-life
AUC Area under the curve
β Terminal half-life
Cl Clearance
Cmax Maximum concentration
Cmaxss Steady-state maximum concentration
Css Steady-state concentration
CYP Cytochrome P450
F Bioavailability
fT>MIC Free concentration time above minimum
inhibitory concentration
ICU Intensive care unit
Ke Elimination constant
LD Loading dose
LOS Length of stay
MIC Minimum inhibitory concentration
PD Pharmacodynamics
PK Pharmacokinetics
PK/PD Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics
TDM Therapeutic drug monitoring
T1/2 Half-life
T>MIC Time above mean inhibitory concentration
Vd Volume of distribution
A.T. Gerlach, PharmD, BCPS, FCCP, FCCM (*)
Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University
Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
e-mail: gerlach.6@osu.edu
L. Saliba, PharmD, BCPS
Department of Pharmacy, Yale-New Haven Hospital,
New Haven, CT 06510, USA
e-mail: lina.saliba@ynhh.org
Introduction
The physiological responses to surgery, critical illness, and
subsequent resuscitation can alter both pharmacokinetics
(PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) [1]. As a result of these
changes, pharmacotherapy may need to be altered to produce
the desired outcomes. A basic understanding of the principles
of pharmacokinetics, or the movement of drugs in the body,
and pharmacodynamics, the cells responses to drugs, is
needed to maximize pharmacotherapy [2]. This chapter will
review basic pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles and some changes in the critically ill surgical patient.
Pharmacokinetics
Pharmacokinetics is the process by which drugs are absorbed,
distributed, metabolized, and eliminated by the body. It
relates to the concentration of drug in the blood and various
body parts and how drug moves through the body over time.
These principles dictate drug dose and dosing interval, and
understanding them will aid the clinician in medication
selection, dosing, and appropriate monitoring. The four main
pharmacokinetic parameters used in PK models are bioavailability (F), volume of distribution (Vd), half-life (t1/2), and
clearance (Cl). In simple PK modeling, the one-compartment
model assumes a drug enters into a compartment with a
given volume of distribution to achieve a homogenous concentration and is subsequently eliminated based on an elimination rate constant (ke). Vasoactive catecholamines such as
epinephrine and norepinephrine follow one-compartment
PK model. The two-compartment model aligns better with
what actually occurs in the body clinically. It accounts for a
second compartment mimicking tissues and organs. A drug
enters into a central compartment and distributes between
the central and peripheral compartments [3]. For some very
lipid soluble drugs, such as amiodarone, there are three or
four compartment PK models that also account for adipose
tissue. Despite underlying assumptions to simplify these
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016
N.D. Martin, L.J. Kaplan (eds.), Principles of Adult Surgical Critical Care, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33341-0_41
473
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
