Purpose: Intravenous (IV) fluid therapy is widely used in hospitalized patients. It has been internationally studied in surgical patients, but little attention to date has been dedicated to medical patients within the Italian context. The aims of the present study were to describe the prevalence of fluid therapy and associated factors among Italian patients admitted to medical and surgical units, describe the methods used to manage fluid therapy, and analyze the monitoring of patients by clinical staff. Methods: In this cross-sectional study of 7 hospitals in northern Italy, data on individual and monitoring variables were collected, and their associations with in-hospital fluid therapy were analyzed by using logistic regression analysis. Patients aged Z18 years who were admitted to medical and surgical units were included. Patients who received at least 500 mL of continuous fluids were included in the fluid therapy group. Findings: In total, 785 (median age, 72 years; women, 52%) patients were included in the study, and 293 (37.3%) received fluid therapy. Maintenance was the most frequent reason for prescribing IV fluid therapy (59%). The mean (SD) volume delivered was 1177 (624) mL/d, and the highest volume was infused for replacement therapy (1660 [931] mL/d). The mean volume infused was 19.55 (13) mL/kg/d. The most commonly used fluid solutions were 0.9% sodium chloride (65.7%) and balanced crystalloid without glucose (32.9%). The proportion of patients assessed for urine output (52.6% vs 36.8%; P o 0.001), serum electrolyte concentrations (74.4% vs 65.0%; P ¼ 0.005), and renal function (70.0% vs 58.7%; P ¼ 0.002) was significantly higher in patients who did receive fluid therapy versus those who did not. In contrast, the use of weight and fluid assessments was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P ¼ 0.216 and 0.256, respectively). Patients admitted for gastrointestinal disorders (odds ratio [OR], 3.5 [95% CI, 1.8–7.05) and for fluid/electrolyte imbalances (OR, 3.35 [95% CI, 1.06–10.52) were more likely to receive fluids. However, the likelihood of receiving fluids was lower for patients admitted to a surgical unit (OR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.22–0.59]) and with cardiovascular diseases (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.17–0.79). Implications: Only one third of the study patients received fluid therapy. Crystalloid fluids, are the fluids of choice for maintaining plasma volume. During fluid therapy, measurement of the serum electrolyte concentrations, renal function, and urine output was largely used while weight and fluid balance were rarely assessed.

Brugnolli A, Canzan F, Bevilacqua A, Marognolli O, Verlato G, Vincenzi S, et al. (2017). Fluid Therapy Management in Hospitalized Patients: Results From a Cross-sectional Study. CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 39(2), 311-321 [10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.12.013.].

Fluid Therapy Management in Hospitalized Patients: Results From a Cross-sectional Study

AMBROSI, ELISA
2017

Abstract

Purpose: Intravenous (IV) fluid therapy is widely used in hospitalized patients. It has been internationally studied in surgical patients, but little attention to date has been dedicated to medical patients within the Italian context. The aims of the present study were to describe the prevalence of fluid therapy and associated factors among Italian patients admitted to medical and surgical units, describe the methods used to manage fluid therapy, and analyze the monitoring of patients by clinical staff. Methods: In this cross-sectional study of 7 hospitals in northern Italy, data on individual and monitoring variables were collected, and their associations with in-hospital fluid therapy were analyzed by using logistic regression analysis. Patients aged Z18 years who were admitted to medical and surgical units were included. Patients who received at least 500 mL of continuous fluids were included in the fluid therapy group. Findings: In total, 785 (median age, 72 years; women, 52%) patients were included in the study, and 293 (37.3%) received fluid therapy. Maintenance was the most frequent reason for prescribing IV fluid therapy (59%). The mean (SD) volume delivered was 1177 (624) mL/d, and the highest volume was infused for replacement therapy (1660 [931] mL/d). The mean volume infused was 19.55 (13) mL/kg/d. The most commonly used fluid solutions were 0.9% sodium chloride (65.7%) and balanced crystalloid without glucose (32.9%). The proportion of patients assessed for urine output (52.6% vs 36.8%; P o 0.001), serum electrolyte concentrations (74.4% vs 65.0%; P ¼ 0.005), and renal function (70.0% vs 58.7%; P ¼ 0.002) was significantly higher in patients who did receive fluid therapy versus those who did not. In contrast, the use of weight and fluid assessments was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P ¼ 0.216 and 0.256, respectively). Patients admitted for gastrointestinal disorders (odds ratio [OR], 3.5 [95% CI, 1.8–7.05) and for fluid/electrolyte imbalances (OR, 3.35 [95% CI, 1.06–10.52) were more likely to receive fluids. However, the likelihood of receiving fluids was lower for patients admitted to a surgical unit (OR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.22–0.59]) and with cardiovascular diseases (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.17–0.79). Implications: Only one third of the study patients received fluid therapy. Crystalloid fluids, are the fluids of choice for maintaining plasma volume. During fluid therapy, measurement of the serum electrolyte concentrations, renal function, and urine output was largely used while weight and fluid balance were rarely assessed.
2017
Brugnolli A, Canzan F, Bevilacqua A, Marognolli O, Verlato G, Vincenzi S, et al. (2017). Fluid Therapy Management in Hospitalized Patients: Results From a Cross-sectional Study. CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS, 39(2), 311-321 [10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.12.013.].
Brugnolli A; Canzan F; Bevilacqua A; Marognolli O; Verlato G; Vincenzi S; Ambrosi E
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/608228
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact