Tiens
Pour les directeurs m�dicaux de SMU
Dans la panoplie de solutions du soulagement des douleurs cardiaques

Outre l'interdiciton syst�matique du Nitro SL

En passant par l'acc�s IV obligatoire pr�-administration

Incluant :
Les seuils inf�rieurs de T/A
et/ou 
Jumel� � la r�ponse d'une premi�re dose
et/ou 
Jumel� � des indicateurs cliniques

Ou, 
Finalement, � l'utilisation encore plus adapt� du Dx du 12 d�riv�es


Probl�matique
Tr�s bien illustr� ici dans l'�change qui suit
...� not� les indices d'�l�ments historiques autant que g�ographiques

Charles Brault
> 
> 
> 
> On 22 Mar 2003, at 21:13, Jon Hoerner wrote:
> 
> > My question to you all... do you really believe it is necessary
> for
> 
> > a patient to have IV access before NTG administration in the
> > pre-hospital setting???
> 
> Our system addressed this some years ago. We utilize a systolic 
> BP of 110 as a bottom-end cut-off for standing-order NTG (which 
> can be given without an IV, and is expected in fact to be done that
> 
> way). As long as the BP remains above 110/systolic, we can 
> continue to administer NTG, regardless of whether an IV is in place
> 
> or not. We use a systolic BP of 140 as bottom-end for using a 
> higher loading of NTG (ntg, 2 minutes, ntg, 5 minutes, ntg, then
> ntg 
> q5 minutes, provided BP remains above 140) for pulmonary edema.
> 
> Our bottom-end systolic BPs were set by the medical directors 
> based on a combination of studies regarding RVI and their 
> experience (which suggested that even with a RVI, if they have a 
> BP of >110, the NTG won't drop them too precipitously...but it will
> 
> drop it enough to prevent us from really dumping their BP with a 
> second NTG).
> 
> It works well. 17 years, I've never had a patient drop their BP <
> 90 
> with NTG I've given, and a BP of 90, while a drop for some folks,
> is 
> pretty well tolerated if the patient isn't sitting upright or
> standing.
> 
> So...yes, provided the patient has a good enough BP to begin with, 
> you probably have little initial worry with NTG, IV or not.
> Besides, 
> most places seem to hang those little bags with a micro-drip for 
> hearts...so what's the difference? Like you can really give a good 
> fluid challenge with that.
> 
> Bob
> Bob Ball
> Minneapolis, Minnesota
> 
> "I'd tell you more, but suddenly I am run over by a truck"
> -Michael O'Donoghue, "How to Write Good", National Lampoon 1971
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey list buddies.
> 
> 
> I function under 2 sets of protocols (one for when I work in
> Eastern
> PA, the other when I'm in Western PA).  There are some significant
> differences in these protocols.  One major difference that I have
> recently debated involves the "Chest pain of suspected cardiac
> origin"
> protocol.
> 
> One protocol states that the patient must have an IV established
> before giving any NTG SL.  The Western PA protocol states that NTG
> should be given prior to attempting IV access (as long as the usual
> conditions are met.. BP above 100 systolic, etc.).  Similar
> differences occur in the CHF/Pulmonary Edema protocol where the one
> does not allow NTG SL until IV, and the other has aggressive NTG
> treatment even before IV access.
> 
> My question to you all... do you really believe it is necessary for
> a
> patient to have IV access before NTG administration in the
> pre-hospital setting??? Personally, I don't have any problem giving
> NTG before IV access if the BP is greater than 120. If it's between
> 100 and 120, I'll quick check for a right sided infarct before
> giving
> NTG.  Those I talk to in Eastern PA say it is crazy to give NTG
> before IV.  I think you are delaying a needed treatment for an
> unnecessary reason.
> 
> As for the Pulmonary Edema protocol, I think it is a no-brainer to
> allow NTG before IV access.  NTG is a rapid treatment for pulmonary
> edema, whereas Lasix will take a while to do its job.  
> 
> Soooo.. Share your knowledge and anecdotal tales with me :-)
> 
> 
> *Jon
> 
> 
> 
> My question to you all... do you really believe it is necessary for
> a
> patient to have IV access before NTG administration in the pre
> hospital setting???
> 
> Jon,
> 
> 
> 
> I think that if the patient has never had nitro before they should
> have an IV established because you do not know how they are going
> to
> react and I'd hate to dump ones pressure with No IV in place.  For
> those who have had it with no adverse reactions...... but......if
> they are having a certain type of MI it may dump their pressure
> whether they have had it before or not. sooooo......
> 
> Dawn :-)
> 
> 
> Clinically an IV prior to NTG or MS is only indicated in the
> setting
> of an Inferior MI (specifically Inferiors with associated RVI). 
> SInce these patients are pre-load dependent and both NTG and MS
> reduces pre-load (and after-load) you run the risk of hypotension
> which will make the ischemia worse.  The good news is that if you
> "tank them up" with fluid prior to giving these meds and give the
> NTG
> by drip (it is safer in this setting) and MS in small increments
> the
> effects will be greatly reduced.  In the event administration of
> these meds makes the patient hypotensive it can be easily corrected
> with fluid administration.
> 
> Just my 2 cents worth
> 
> 
> Lee Richardson, NREMT-P, LP,  CCEMT-P
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon,
> 
> This will always be controversial, but consider this. Patients are
> prescribed NTG for home use all the time, and they don't start an
> IV
> on themselves prior to administering the drug. If they have used
> NTG
> before without any problems, and their pressure is >100, then there
> is no reason to delay treatment. On the other hand, the absence of
> RVI is no guarantee that the patient will not bottom out with NTG.
> Other medical conditions can predispose the patient to sudden
> hypotension.
> 
> I agree with you that patients in pulmonary edema, particularly the
> hypertensive ones, are not likely to bottom out with NTG. What if
> you
> are unsuccessful at obtaining IV access? You need to weigh the
> benefits of NTG against the risk causing an adverse reaction. For
> all
> you know, the patient is experiencing chest discomfort, perhaps
> even
> acute myocardial infarction, secondary to acute coronary vasospasm
> that could be totally reversed with NTG.
> 
> That's my take on it.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> We had the difference of opinions at my service with most; if not
> all
> medications given, and what it came down to quite honestly, was;
> 'are
> you willing to forego the medication in an effort to initiate the
> IV?'
> 
> The question arose about the Pulmonary Edema patient, and "what if
> you cannot get IV access" after you have administered the NTG? 
> Excellent question, but it rolls both ways. What if you withhold
> the
> NTG to get an IV and you are unsuccessful? The AMI patient is the
> same, "Time is muscle", we have all had that drilled for years now,
> the longer we wait to treat the problem, the more damage that is
> constantly occuring. It may take you the duration of the transport
> to
> finally get an IV, G** knows we have all had one of those patients.
> Muscle is deteriorating for the duration, be it 5 minutes or in our
> case, nearly 40 minutes.
> 
> If they are hypersensitive to NTG, the half life of NTG is about 1
> to
> 4 minutes, raise the feet, and get a line started, the BP will
> normalize on it's own, in the meantime, even a BP of 70/- is
> acceptable for a short time, (permissive hypotension in medical and
> trauma patients).
> 
> My thoughts are that if the patient is within the hemo limits, NTG
> should be given without IV access.
> 
> Just my 0.02 wirth....:)
> 
> Mike 
> 
> Michael 'TJ' Hatfield EMT-P
> 
> "I would rather you call me and not need me, than need me and not
> call me." quem di diligunt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon,
> 
> I think you are right on.  I have not ever personally encountered a
> patient who is "sensitive to NTG" (20 plus years as EMT-P)  but I
> suppose like anything else it could and does happen.  Recent
> studies
> (trauma) are indicating that the legs up (trendelenburg or shock
> position) really doesn't do a whole lot and probably isn't worth
> the
> effort.  Current stats show about 30-32% of inferior MI's are
> associated with RVI.  As you say, it seems like a reasonable mode
> given the odds. Performing a rapid baseline 12-lead EKG will
> provide
> you with the most definitive answer but, if you do not have access
> to
> one then  I would have to add that a good clinical assessment may
> help you make an educated desicion re: the IV before or after. Due
> to
> the pathophysiology of an inferior MI patients usually present with
> the " oooh he looks sick!" or the "fixin to die" look, that is, the
> very pale/ashen/diaphoretic skin with or without the other typical
> presentations. 
> 
> Lee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your
> desktop!
> http://platinum.yahoo.com
> 
> --- SMU-L
> Si vous avez plusieurs adresses email, vous pouvez les envoyer a 
> Frederic Giroux a l'adresse [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Un (ou des) 
> alias pourront ainsi etre crees pour que vous puissiez envoyer des 
> messages a travers la liste a partir de n'importe quel de vos
> alias.  
> Autrement, les messages qui proviennent d'une adresse non-listee
> sont 
> automatiquement rejetes.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com

--- URG-L
Pour modifier votre adresse de courriel sur URG-L, envoyez un avis a 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] en indiquant votre nouvelle adresse ainsi 
que l'ancienne et le nom de la liste.


Répondre à