The reason is that these patients are critically ill and the expectation of CMS 
is that patients accessing critical care services should be seen by a licensed 
provider skilled in assessing volume status and adequacy of perfusion.

The expectation as well is that only a licensed provider can issue orders to 
react to inadequate perfusion.  Relying on telephone communication and time 
delays associated with nursing report of information gathered second hand 
dilutes the information.  In essence, "seeing is believing" and direct 
observation is more likely to result in well considered orders to correct 
underlying hypoperfusion.

This is especially true in the early phases of a patient's critical illness 
where it is eminently reasonable that a patient be re-evaluated by trained eyes 
and hands.

Imagine families' expectations as well that a loved one in the ICU needs to be 
seen only once, if at all, to be properly cared for?

Not to put too much shame into the matter, but this is actually an instance 
where our habitual care patterns are exposed to reality and look pretty flimsy.

Finally, it's worth remembering that rather than placing central lines and 
assessing cvp and scvo2 as a mandatory approach, providers are merely being 
asked to examine their patients.

All that said, yes, many nurses are skilled and capable of assisting in this 
regard.  Unfortunately, there are those who are not as well, and there is no 
way to eliminate the vagaries of second hand communication and delays in order 
writing with a nurse directed approach.

Hope that helps a little bit.





On Sep 22, 2015, at 3:31 PM, 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hello,

I am writing to query if there is any evidence-based reason why CMS is 
requiring a bedside physician assessment for septic shock patients, when the 
standard for other critically ill patients is typically based on a bedside 
nursing assessment that is reported to the physician by telephone. I work in an 
underserved minority population where physician access is challenging without 
the bedside assessment requirement, and I am curious if there is a rationale 
for this deviation from the norm.

Thanks for your input,

Gayle Porter, RN BSN
Sepsis Program Coordinator
Brownsville, TX


_______________________________________________
Sepsisgroups mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.sepsisgroups.org/listinfo.cgi/sepsisgroups-sepsisgroups.org
_______________________________________________
Sepsisgroups mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sepsisgroups.org/listinfo.cgi/sepsisgroups-sepsisgroups.org

Reply via email to