Pulmonologists

肺科医师
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    考虑到印度慢性呼吸道疾病(CRD)的巨大负担,需要当地相关的肺康复(PR)服务。这项横断面调查旨在探索人们的兴趣,浦那市公关的各种利益相关者之间的需求和挑战,印度。在浦那一家多专科医院的门诊呼吸内科,印度,403名符合条件的CRD人士被邀请参与调查,其中370人(92%)回应并同意参与。(220名男性,平均±SD年龄56±15岁)。在370人中,有323人(87%)热衷于参加公关。在多重选择问题中,倾向于纸质手册,基于家庭(70%)和基于网络(84%)的计划。207个医疗保健提供者(HCP),包括医生,参与浦那市CRD患者护理的肺科医师和物理治疗师应邀参加了调查。在207人中,(80%)的HCP认为PR是一种有效的管理策略,并强调缺乏有关PR的信息,需要更好地了解PR(48%)及其转诊过程。接受调查的利益相关者已经准备好接受公关,围绕公关的进一步知识确定具体需求,交付方式,和推荐流程,这可能会促进印度医疗保健环境中相关公关计划的发展。
    Considering a huge burden of chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) in India, there is a need for locally relevant Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) services. This cross-sectional survey was aimed to explore the interest, needs and challenges among various stakeholders for PR in Pune city, India. At the outpatient respiratory medicine department of a multi-speciality hospital in Pune, India, 403 eligible people with CRDs were invited to participate in the survey, of which 370 (92%) responded and agreed to participate. (220 males, mean ± SD age 56 ± 15 years). Out of the 370, 323 (87%) people with CRDs were keen to attend PR. In a multiple selection question, there was inclination towards paper-based manuals home-based (70%) and web-based (84%) programs. 207 healthcare providers (HCPs), including physicians, pulmonologists and physiotherapists involved in the care of people living with CRDs across Pune city were invited to participate in the survey. Out of the 207, (80%) of the HCPs believed that PR was an effective management strategy and highlighted the lack of information on PR and need for better understanding of PR (48%) and its referral process. The surveyed stakeholders are ready to take up PR, identifying specific needs around further knowledge of PR, modes of delivery, and referral processes, that could potentially feed the development of relevant PR programs in the Indian healthcare settings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)构成了巨大的全球健康负担,尽管在很大程度上是可以预防和治疗的。尽管有指南,COPD护理在许多情况下仍然欠佳,包括高收入国家(HIC)和中上收入国家(UMICs),具有多种诊断和管理方法。这项研究旨在确定六个国家(澳大利亚,西班牙,台湾,阿根廷,墨西哥,和俄罗斯)为改善护理的全球政策举措提供信息。
    为每个国家绘制了COPD护理路径,并补充了流行病学,健康-经济,和临床数据来自有针对性的文献综述。对17名呼吸护理临床医生进行了半结构化访谈,以进一步验证路径并确定关键障碍。主题内容分析用于生成主题。
    六个主题在大多数HIC和UMIC中很常见:“COPD诊断的挑战”,“加强初级保健的作用”,“支离破碎的医疗系统和协调挑战”,“COPD急性加重的管理不足”,“获得专门护理的机会有限”和,“资金不足和过载的医疗保健系统的影响”。一个主题,“保险范围和报销挑战”,与UMICs更相关。HIC和UMIC在患者和医疗保健提供者的意识方面有所不同,初级保健参与,肺活量测定接入,和专业护理的可用性。两者都面临着医疗保健碎片化的问题,指导方针坚持,和COPD急性加重管理。此外,UMICs还努力应对资源限制和医疗保健基础设施挑战。
    COPD护理的许多挑战在HIC和UMIC中都是相同的,强调了这些问题的普遍性。虽然特定国家的问题需要定制的解决方案,实施支持各国有效管理COPD的全球呼吸策略还有尚未开发的可能性.除了医疗保健系统级别的举措,迫切需要对COPD进行政治优先排序,以分配其所需的基本资源.
    UNASSIGNED: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a significant global health burden despite being largely preventable and treatable. Despite the availability of guidelines, COPD care remains suboptimal in many settings, including high-income countries (HICs) and upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), with varied approaches to diagnosis and management. This study aimed to identify common and unique barriers to COPD care across six countries (Australia, Spain, Taiwan, Argentina, Mexico, and Russia) to inform global policy initiatives for improved care.
    UNASSIGNED: COPD care pathways were mapped for each country and supplemented with epidemiological, health-economic, and clinical data from a targeted literature review. Semi-structured interviews with 17 respiratory care clinicians were used to further validate the pathways and identify key barriers. Thematic content analysis was used to generate the themes.
    UNASSIGNED: Six themes were common in most HICs and UMICs: \"Challenges in COPD diagnosis\", \"Strengthening the role of primary care\", \"Fragmented healthcare systems and coordination challenges\", \"Inadequate management of COPD exacerbations\", \"Limited access to specialized care\" and, \"Impact of underfinanced and overloaded healthcare systems\". One theme, \"Insurance coverage and reimbursement challenges\", was more relevant for UMICs. HICs and UMICs differ in patient and healthcare provider awareness, primary care involvement, spirometry access, and availability of specialized care. Both face issues with healthcare fragmentation, guideline adherence, and COPD exacerbation management. In addition, UMICs also grapple with resource limitations and healthcare infrastructure challenges.
    UNASSIGNED: Many challenges to COPD care are the same in both HICs and UMICs, underscoring the pervasive nature of these issues. While country-specific issues require customized solutions, there are untapped possibilities for implementing global respiratory strategies that support countries to manage COPD effectively. In addition to healthcare system-level initiatives, there is a crucial need for political prioritization of COPD to allocate the essential resources it requires.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在COVID-19大流行期间,普遍戴口罩成为主要的公共卫生干预措施之一。正因为如此,大多数体检,包括肺部听诊,是在患者戴着外科口罩时完成的。这项研究的目的是调查戴口罩是否会对肺部听诊期间的肺科医师评估产生影响。
    这是一项重复的措施交叉设计研究。指示三名肺科医师听诊先前已证实过期时间延长的患者,喘息,或在患者戴或不戴口罩时发出裂纹(医生和患者被不透明的屏障隔开)。作为肺科医师在评估肺音方面的共识的衡量标准,我们使用了Fleisskappa(K)。
    在所有三个类别(正常肺音,有效期,和不定肺音)患者是否戴着口罩,但是在肺音评估方面,肺科医师之间存在显着差异。
    临床医生和卫生专业人员戴口罩时更安全,不会受到呼吸道感染。应鼓励患者佩戴口罩,因为我们的研究证明,无论患者是否佩戴口罩,肺科医师对听诊肺音的评估没有显著的一致性差异。
    UNASSIGNED: During the COVID-19 pandemic, universal mask-wearing became one of the main public health interventions. Because of this, most physical examinations, including lung auscultation, were done while patients were wearing surgical face masks. The aim of this study was to investigate whether mask wearing has an impact on pulmonologist assessment during auscultation of the lungs.
    UNASSIGNED: This was a repeated measures crossover design study. Three pulmonologists were instructed to auscultate patients with previously verified prolonged expiration, wheezing, or crackles while patients were wearing or not wearing masks (physician and patients were separated by an opaque barrier). As a measure of pulmonologists\' agreement in the assessment of lung sounds, we used Fleiss kappa (K).
    UNASSIGNED: There was no significant difference in agreement on physician assessment of lung sounds in all three categories (normal lung sound, duration of expiration, and adventitious lung sound) whether the patient was wearing a mask or not, but there were significant differences among pulmonologists when it came to agreement of lung sound assessment.
    UNASSIGNED: Clinicians and health professionals are safer from respiratory infections when they are wearing masks, and patients should be encouraged to wear masks because our research proved no significant difference in agreement on pulmonologists\' assessment of auscultated lung sounds whether or not patients wore masks.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:哮喘患者和COPD患者的吸入器教育通常由非肺科医师提供。我们研究了肺科医师对吸入器的教育,以确定临床结果和吸入器使用的变化。
    方法:这是一项对296名被诊断为哮喘的受试者进行的回顾性研究,COPD,或评估吸入器技术教育的使用及其对(1)吸入器/剂量变化的影响,包括同一类吸入器的剂量变化和/或吸入器数量的变化,(2)一秒用力呼气量/用力肺活量(FEV1/FVC%),(3)疾病症状控制,(4)门诊就诊,(5)紧急护理访视(6)急诊科访视,(7)住院。一组接受了肺科医师的吸入器技术培训,而另一组则没有。
    结果:接受过肺科医师吸入器技术培训的组吸入器/剂量增加的相对风险显着降低(相对风险比0.57[95%CI0.34-0.96],P=0.03),症状控制的几率显着增加(赔率2.15[95%CI1.24-3.74],与无教育组相比,1-y随访时P=0.01)。FEV1/FVC%无差异,门诊就诊,紧急护理访问,急诊部门的访问,和入院。
    结论:肺科医师对哮喘和COPD患者吸入器技术的教育与吸入器/剂量增加的相对风险降低和症状控制的几率增加相关。我们建议肺科医师为哮喘患者和COPD患者提供吸入器技术教育,而不是仅仅依靠非肺科医师的教育。需要进行前瞻性研究以确认适当吸入器技术的重要性。
    BACKGROUND: Inhaler education for patients with asthma and patients with COPD is typically provided by non-pulmonologists. We studied inhaler education by pulmonologists to determine changes in clinical outcomes and inhaler use.
    METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 296 subjects diagnosed with asthma, COPD, or both that evaluated use of inhaler technique education and its impact on (1) inhaler/dosage change consisting of dosage change in the same class of inhaler and/or change in number of inhalers, (2) forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC%), (3) disease symptom control, (4) out-patient visits, (5) urgent care visits (6) emergency department visits, and (7) hospital admissions. One group received inhaler technique education by a pulmonologist while the other group did not.
    RESULTS: The pulmonologist inhaler technique-educated group had significantly decreased relative risk for inhaler/dosage increase (relative risk 0.57 [95% CI 0.34-0.96], P = .03) and significantly increased odds for symptom control (odds ratio 2.15 [95% CI 1.24-3.74], P = .01) at 1-y follow-up as compared to the no education group. No differences occurred for FEV1/FVC%, out-patient visits, urgent care visits, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions.
    CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonologist education of inhaler technique for patients with asthma and patients with COPD was associated with decreased relative risk for inhaler/dosage increase and increased odds for symptom control. We recommend pulmonologists provide education of inhaler technique to patients with asthma and patients with COPD and not rely on non-pulmonologist education alone. Prospective research is needed to confirm the importance of proper inhaler techniques.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: English Abstract
    COPD是全球第三大死亡原因,在阿根廷,COPD的患病率为14.5%,但是在现实生活中对病人的管理是未知的。这项工作的目的是:a)了解阿根廷肺科医师在日常实践的不同方面管理COPD患者的意见。b)将我们的发现与西班牙的专家进行比较,c)考虑我们的结果,以计划我国COPD管理的未来指令。
    来自阿根廷的89名肺科医师,COPD专家,参加了德尔菲共识,他回答了一项有五个域名的调查。a)坚持治疗,b)控制COPD,c)可处理特征,d)吸入装置和e)治疗资源的可达性。
    经过两轮提问,77.6%的陈述达成了总体共识,并按领域区分:治疗依从性:5/9(55.5%).COPD控制:10/14(71.4%)。可处理性状:6/6(100%)。吸入装置:10/14(71.4%)和治疗可达性:6/6(100%)。在大多数的肯定中,结果与西班牙肺科医师获得的结果相似。
    来自阿根廷的肺科医师以与西班牙同事相似的方式治疗COPD患者,差异很小。很明显,在日常实践中,有一些因素会对获得指定治疗产生负面影响。我们的工作可以作为改善这种情况的起点。
    UNASSIGNED: COPD is the third cause of death globally and in Argentina COPD has a prevalence of 14.5%, but the management of patients in real life is unknown. The objectives of this work were: a) To know the opinions of pulmonologists in Argentina who manage patients with COPD in different aspects of daily practice. b) Compare our findings with specialists from Spain and c) Consider our results to plan future directives in the management of COPD in our country.
    UNASSIGNED: 89 pulmonologists from Argentina, experts in COPD, participated in a Delphi consensus, who responded to a survey with five domains. a) Adherence to treatment, b) Control of COPD, c) Treatable features, d) Inhalation devices and e) Accessibility to therapeutic resources.
    UNASSIGNED: After two rounds of questions, total consensus was achieved in 77.6% of the statements and discriminating by domain: Treatment adherence: 5/9 (55.5%). COPD control: 10/14 (71.4%). Treatable traits: 6/6 (100%). Inhalation devices: 10/14 (71.4%) and Accessibility to treatment: 6/6 (100%). In most of the affirmations, the results were similar to those obtained by Spanish pulmonologists.
    UNASSIGNED: Pulmonologists from Argentina manage COPD patients in a similar way and with minimal differences with our Spanish colleagues. It became evident that, in daily practice, there are factors that negatively impact access to the indicated treatments. Our work could serve as a starting point to improve this situation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    据报道,英国不同的专科神经肌肉中心在杜兴氏肌营养不良症(DMD)的呼吸护理提供方面存在明显的不一致。缺乏强有力的临床证据和专家共识是公共医疗保健系统中实施护理建议的障碍,因为需要提高对患有DMD的人的护理关键方面的认识。这里,我们为英国患有DMD的儿童和成人的呼吸护理提供基于证据和/或基于共识的最佳实践,作为常规护理和紧急情况的一部分。
    方法:由英国呼吸内科专家工作组(包括英国胸科学会(BTS)代表)发起,神经肌肉临床医生,物理治疗师和患者代表,准则草案是根据公布的证据制定的,目前的做法和专家意见。在与英国呼吸团队和神经肌肉服务机构进行广泛协商后,对于DMD中呼吸护理的这些最佳实践建议达成共识.
    结果:由此产生的建议以评估和监测流程图的形式呈现,有额外的指导和单独的图表列出了应急管理的关键考虑因素。建议已得到BTS的认可。
    结论:这些指南提供了实用的,为所有DMD儿童和成人日常和急性呼吸道护理管理人员提供合理的建议。希望这将支持患者和医疗保健专业人员在英国各地获得高标准的护理。
    Significant inconsistencies in respiratory care provision for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) are reported across different specialist neuromuscular centres in the UK. The absence of robust clinical evidence and expert consensus is a barrier to the implementation of care recommendations in public healthcare systems as is the need to increase awareness of key aspects of care for those living with DMD. Here, we provide evidenced-based and/or consensus-based best practice for the respiratory care of children and adults living with DMD in the UK, both as part of routine care and in an emergency.
    METHODS: Initiated by an expert working group of UK-based respiratory physicians (including British Thoracic Society (BTS) representatives), neuromuscular clinicians, physiotherapist and patient representatives, draft guidelines were created based on published evidence, current practice and expert opinion. After wider consultation with UK respiratory teams and neuromuscular services, consensus was achieved on these best practice recommendations for respiratory care in DMD.
    RESULTS: The resulting recommendations are presented in the form of a flow chart for assessment and monitoring, with additional guidance and a separate chart setting out key considerations for emergency management. The recommendations have been endorsed by the BTS.
    CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide practical, reasoned recommendations for all those managing day-to-day and acute respiratory care in children and adults with DMD. The hope is that this will support patients and healthcare professionals in accessing high standards of care across the UK.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    特发性肺纤维化(IPF)是一种严重的疾病,其病程不可预测,生存率与某些癌症相当。IPF患者承受着相当大的症状负担,生活质量下降,和高医疗资源利用率。患者和护理人员报告许多未满足的需求,包括对更多关于诊断和帮助导航疾病轨迹的教育的愿望。令人信服的证据表明,姑息治疗(PC)为患有严重疾病的患者提供了额外的支持。
    这项调查的目的是获得南卡罗来纳州(SC)董事会认证的肺科医师对IPF患者的PC的看法。
    一项24项调查是从肺纤维化基金会PC调查仪器改编的(经许可)。分析数据并给出结果。
    肺病学家(n=32,44%)完成了调查;97%的人在城市化环境中实践。大多数人同意PC和临终关怀不提供相同的服务。在讨论预后时,人们对舒适度有不同的看法,疾病轨迹,并解决预先指令。门诊和住院PC的选择有限,并且不会进行早期PC转诊。没有报告在初次IPF诊断时开始PC转诊。
    参与本调查的SC肺科医师了解PC为IPF患者提供全面护理的原则,并且对PC转诊的选择有限。在诊断早期提供的PC教育材料可以帮助促进和指导临终计划和讨论。服务不足社区的患者资源最少。
    UNASSIGNED: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a serious illness with an unpredictable disease course and survival rates comparable with some cancers. Patients with IPF suffer considerable symptom burden, declining quality of life, and high health care resource utilization. Patients and caregivers report many unmet needs, including a desire for more education regarding diagnosis and assistance with navigating disease trajectory. Compelling evidence suggests that palliative care (PC) provides an extra layer of support for patients with serious illness.
    UNASSIGNED: The purpose of this survey was to gain perspectives regarding PC for patients with IPF by board-certified pulmonologists in South Carolina (SC).
    UNASSIGNED: A 24-item survey was adapted (with permission) from the Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation PC Survey instrument. Data were analyzed and results are presented.
    UNASSIGNED: Pulmonologists (n = 32, 44%) completed the survey; 97% practice in urbanized settings. The majority agreed that PC and hospice do not provide the same service. There were varying views about comfort in discussing prognosis, disease trajectory, and addressing advance directives. Options for ambulatory and inpatient PC are limited and early PC referral does not occur. None reported initiating a PC referral at time of initial IPF diagnosis.
    UNASSIGNED: Pulmonologists in SC who participated in this survey are aware of the principles of PC in providing comprehensive care to patients with IPF and have limited options for PC referral. PC educational materials provided early in the diagnosis can help facilitate and guide end-of-life planning and discussions. Minimal resources exist for patients in underserved communities.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    配景与目标:肺动脉高压(PAH)是一种罕见的小肺动脉慢性疾病,惹起右心衰竭和逝世亡。PAH的准确管理对于降低发病率和死亡率是必要的。了解PAH的当前实践和观点很重要。为此,我们打算确定医生的知识,态度,和土耳其成人肺动脉高压(PAH)的实践模式。材料和方法:在2022年1月至2月之间,通过电子邮件发送了一份在线问卷给所有心脏病专家和肺科医生,他们是土耳其心脏病学会(TSC)和土耳其胸科学会(TTS)的成员。结果:共有200名医生(122名肺科医师和78名心脏病医师)回答了问卷。心脏病专家比肺科专家更频繁地参与PAH的主要诊断和治疗(37.2%vs.23.8%,p=0.042)。超过一半的医生可以使用右心导管。在血管反应性试验阴性的轻度/中度PAH患者中,在这些患者中,单药治疗是最优选的(82.8%),内皮素受体拮抗剂(ERA)是最优选的组(73%).ERA加磷酸二酯酶-5抑制剂(PDE-5INH)是最优选的(69%)联合治疗,只有肺科医师更喜欢前列环素类似物和PDE-5INH。结论:总体而言,PAH患者的临床治疗符合指南建议.在拥有右心导管插入术的专业中心中,PAH的有效临床管理可获得更好的结果。
    Background and Objectives: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare chronic disease of the small pulmonary arteries that causes right heart failure and death. Accurate management of PAH is necessary to decrease morbidity and mortality. Understanding current practices and perspectives on PAH is important. For this purpose, we intended to determine physicians\' knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns in adult pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) in Turkey. Materials and Methods: Between January and February 2022, an online questionnaire was sent via e-mail to all cardiologists and pulmonologists who were members of the Turkish Society of Cardiology (TSC) and the Turkish Thoracic Society (TTS). Results: A total of 200 physicians (122 pulmonologists and 78 cardiologists) responded to the questionnaire. Cardiologists were more frequently involved in the primary diagnosis and treatment of PAH than pulmonologists (37.2% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.042). More than half of the physicians had access to right heart catheterization. In mild/moderate PAH patients with a negative vasoreactivity test, the monotherapy option was most preferred (82.8%) and endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) were the most preferred group in these patients (73%). ERAs plus phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE-5 INH) were the most preferred (69%) combination therapy, and prostacyclin analogues plus PDE-5 INH was preferred by only pulmonologists. Conclusions: Overall, clinical management of patients with PAH complied with guideline recommendations. Effective clinical management of PAH in specialized centers that having right heart catheterization achieve better outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    COVID-19急性呼吸窘迫综合征(CARDS)是COVID-19最严重的并发症。SARS-CoV-2的爆发迅速饱和了重症监护病房(ICU),在呼吸中间监护病房(RICU)强制应用无创呼吸支持(NIRS)。这项研究的主要目的是比较患者的临床特征和结果(Helmet-持续气道正压通气(H-CPAP)成功/失败和生存/死亡)。次要目的是评估和检测H-CPAP成功和生存/死亡的主要预测因素。在我们的观察性前瞻性研究中,共有515名患者被纳入了基于在三次意大利大流行浪潮中在RICU开发的CARDS的研究。所有入选患者均接受H-CPAP治疗。在H-CPAP过程中,动脉氧分压(PaO2)和吸入氧分压(FiO2)PaO2/FiO2的最差比率将受试者分层为轻度,中度和重度卡。在三波过程中,H-CPAP的成功率有所提高(62%,69%和77%,分别)和死亡率下降(28%,21%和13%)。H-CPAP的成功/失败和生存/死亡与H-CPAP的PaO2/FiO2(最差评分)比率和类固醇的给药有关。入院时D-二聚体,FiO2和呼气末正压(PEEP)也与H-CPAP成功相关。我们的研究表明H-CPAP在RICU的CARDS中具有良好的效果。类固醇的广泛使用可能会发挥作用。
    COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (CARDS) is the most serious complication of COVID-19. The SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks rapidly saturated intensive care unit (ICU), forcing the application of non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) in respiratory intermediate care unit (RICU). The primary aim of this study is to compare the patients\' clinical characteristics and outcomes (Helmet-Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (H-CPAP) success/failure and survival/death). The secondary aim is to evaluate and detect the main predictors of H-CPAP success and survival/death. A total of 515 patients were enrolled in our observational prospective study based on CARDS developed in RICU during the three Italian pandemic waves. All selected patients were treated with H-CPAP. The worst ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) PaO2/FiO2 during H-CPAP stratified the subjects into mild, moderate and severe CARDS. H-CPAP success has increased during the three waves (62%, 69% and 77%, respectively) and the mortality rate has decreased (28%, 21% and 13%). H-CPAP success/failure and survival/death were related to the PaO2/FiO2 (worst score) ratio in H-CPAP and to steroids\' administration. D-dimer at admission, FiO2 and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) were also associated with H-CPAP success. Our study suggests good outcomes with H-CPAP in CARDS in RICU. A widespread use of steroids could play a role.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:肝性胸腔积液是与门脉高压相关的胸腔积液;其诊断和治疗可能很困难。本文的目的如下:收集肝胃肠病学家或肺科医师关于肝胸水的诊断和管理的实践。
    方法:邀请来自13个法语国家的从业人员回答关于肝性胸水诊断及其管理的在线问卷。
    结果:五百二十八名从业者(80%来自法国)回答了这项调查。75%是肝胃肠病学家,20%的肺科医师,其余5%属于其他专业。对于64%的响应者,肝性胸水可以位于左肺上(66%的肝胃肠病学家对57%的肺科医师;p=0.25);91%的响应者在没有临床腹水的情况下可以存在肝性胸水(93%的肝胃肠病学家对88%的肺科医师;p=0.27)。43%的应答者在穿刺前系统地进行了超声胸膜扫描(36%的肝胃肠病学家对70%的肺科医师;p<0.001)。73%的应答者在穿刺前进行了胸部X射线检查(79%的肝胃肠病学家对54%的肺科医师;p<0.001)。在自发性细菌性脓胸的情况下,73%的肝胃肠病学家和20%的肺科医师使用了白蛋白输注(p<0.001).37%的响应者使用了引流管(37%的肝肠病学家对31%的肺科医生;p=0.26)。50%的肺科医师和22%的肝胃肠病医师使用留置胸膜导管(p<0.01)。78%的应答者推荐TIPS(85%的肝胃肠病学家对52%的肺科医师;p<0.001)和肝移植,76%的应答者(86%的肝胃肠病学家对44%的肺科医师;p<0.001)。
    结论:这项大型研究的结果为讲法语的肝肠病学家和肺科医师的实践提供了重要数据;看来建议是有必要的。
    BACKGROUND: The Hepatic hydrothorax is a pleural effusion related to portal hypertension; its diagnosis and therapeutic management may be difficult. The aims of this article are which follows: To gather the practices of hepatogastroenterologists or pulmonologists practitioners regarding the diagnosis and management of the hepatic hydrothorax.
    METHODS: Practitioners from 13 French- speaking countries were invited to answer an online questionnaire on the hepatic hydrothorax diagnosis and its management.
    RESULTS: Five hundred twenty-eight practitioners (80% from France) responded to this survey. 75% were hepatogastroenterologists, 20% pulmonologists and the remaining 5% belonged to other specialities. The Hepatic hydrothorax can be located on the left lung for 64% of the responders (66% hepatogastroenterologists vs 57% pulmonologists; p = 0.25); The Hepatic hydrothorax can exist in the absence of clinical ascites for 91% of the responders (93% hepatogastroenterologists vs 88% pulmonologists; p = 0.27). An Ultrasound pleural scanning was systematically performed before a puncture for 43% of the responders (36% hepatogastroenterologists vs 70% pulmonologists; p < 0.001). A chest X-ray was performed before a puncture for 73% of the respondeurs (79% hepatogastroenterologists vs 54% pulmonologists; p < 0.001). In case of a spontaneous bacterial empyema, an albumin infusion was used by 73% hepatogastroenterologists and 20% pulmonologists (p < 0.001). A drain was used by 37% of the responders (37% hepatogastroenterologists vs 31% pulmonologists; p = 0.26).An Indwelling pleural catheter was used by 50% pulmonologists and 22% hepatogastroenterologists (p < 0.01). TIPS was recommended by 78% of the responders (85% hepatogastroenterologists vs 52% pulmonologists; p < 0.001) and a liver transplantation, by 76% of the responders (86% hepatogastroenterologists vs 44% pulmonologists; p < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: The results of this large study provide important data on practices of French speaking hepatogastroenterologists and pulmonologists; it appears that recommendations are warranted.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号