Search - Critical Care Science (CCS)

You searched for:"Ruy Camargo Pires-Neto"

We found (3) results for your search.
  • Editorial

    Awaking, exercising, sitting, walking and extubating: moving on the paradigms for mechanically ventilated patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(3):203-204

    Abstract

    Editorial

    Awaking, exercising, sitting, walking and extubating: moving on the paradigms for mechanically ventilated patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(3):203-204

    DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140030

    Views0
    In the intensive care unit (ICU) patients are exposed to catheters, tubes, alarms and noise, and they experience thirst, hunger, immobility and several other sources of discomfort. How hostile is the ICU environment to patients and to caregivers? It is intuitive to put patients to sleep while they stay in this inhospitable place for life […]
    See more
  • Original Articles

    Ineffectiveness of using the pressure relief valve technique during cuff inflation

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(4):367-372

    Abstract

    Original Articles

    Ineffectiveness of using the pressure relief valve technique during cuff inflation

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(4):367-372

    DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140056

    Views0

    Objective:

    To test the effectiveness of using a cuff pressure relief valve technique to maintain cuff pressure levels within the normal in vitro range (Phase 1) in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (Phase 2) and to test the reproducibility of the technique using different syringes.

    Methods:

    In Phase 1, a tracheal tube was inserted into a trachea model. Ten- and 20mL syringes were used to inflate the cuff through the tracheal tube. The cuff was slowly and steadily inflated until the syringe plunger would move in the opposite direction of the application. After the plunger stopped, the cuff pressures were recorded. In Phase 2, the same maneuvers for inflating the cuff were performed on 20 patients using 5, 10, and 20mL syringes and were compared with manometer measurements. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis were employed to determine the reproducibility and agreement between syringes. Data were expressed as medians (interquartile range).

    Results:

    There was no reproducibility between syringes with an intraclass correlation coefficient ranging between -0.33 and 0.8 (p>0.05). The pressures generated with the syringes were higher than the pressures generated using a standard manometer: the 5mL syringe pressure was 105cmH2O (82.5-120cmH2O), the 10mL syringe pressure was 69cmH2O (47.5-111.3cmH2O), and the 20mL syringe pressure was 45cmH2O (35-59.5cmH2O). The Bland-Altman analysis confirmed the large bias and variability between the syringes used, compared with the manometer.

    Conclusion:

    The use of syringes is not an effective technique for determining the cuff pressure in patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

    See more
    Ineffectiveness of using the pressure relief valve technique during cuff
               inflation
  • Original Articles – Clinical Research

    Characterization of the use of a cycle ergometer to assist in the physical therapy treatment of critically ill patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(1):39-43

    Abstract

    Original Articles – Clinical Research

    Characterization of the use of a cycle ergometer to assist in the physical therapy treatment of critically ill patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(1):39-43

    DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2013000100008

    Views0

    OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to use a cycle ergometer to assess cardiorespiratory changes during active exercise and to verify patients’ satisfaction with this type of activity. METHODS: A single intervention involving active lower limb exercise was performed with a cycle ergometer (without load) for 5 minutes. The following variables were measured before, during and immediately after exercise: heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation and the Borg dyspnea scale score. Following the exercise, the patients answered a questionnaire to evaluate their satisfaction with this type of activity. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients (65% male) with a mean age of 48 ± 16 years old participated in the study. Enrolled patients presented a sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of 2 (0 – 5 scale). During the exercise, 16% of the patients used ventilation support and 55% of them were breathing at room air. A comparison of the initial and final values of the variables indicated increases in the heart rate (92±17 beats/min vs. 95±18 beats/min; p<0.05), the respiratory rate (19 ± 8 breaths/min vs. 23±8 breaths/min; p<0.05) and the Borg dyspnea scale score (1.3±1.8 vs. 2.8±2.2; p<0.05). In addition, 85% of the patients reported enjoying the activity. Only 25% of the patients reported some discomfort, and 100% of the patients wanted to repeat this type of activity in future treatments. CONCLUSION: During the cycle ergometer exercises, minor cardiorespiratory changes were observed in the patients. The evaluated patients reported high satisfaction with this type of activity.

    See more
    Characterization of the use of a cycle ergometer to assist in the physical therapy treatment of critically ill patients

Search

Search in:

Article type
article-commentary
brief-report
case-report
correction
editorial
editorial
letter
letter
other
rapid-communication
reply
research-article
research-article
review-article
Session
Articles
Artigo de Revisão de Pediatria
Artigo Original
Artigo Original de Pediatria
Artigo Original Destaque
Artigos de Revisão
Artigos originais
Author's Response
Brief Communication
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Report
Comentários
Commentaries
Commentary
Consenso Brasileiro de Monitorização e Suporte Hemodinâmico
Correspondence
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorials
Erratum
Letter to the Editor
Letters to the Editor
Original Article
Original Article – Basic Research
Original Article – Neonatologia
Original Articles
Original Articles – Basic Research
Original Articles – Clinical Research
Relato de Caso
Relatos de Caso
Research Letter
Review
Review Article
Special Article
Special Articles
Viewpoint
Year / Volume
2024; v.36
2023; v.35
2022; v.34
2021; v.33
2020; v.32
2019; v.31
2018; v.30
2017; v.29
2016; v.28
2015; v.27
2014; v.26
2013; v.25
2012; v.24
2011; v.23
2010; v.22
2009; v.21
2008; v.20
2007; v.19
2006; v.18
ISSUE