Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Understanding patient-centredness: contrasting expert versus patient perspectives on vasopressor therapy for shock

  • Understanding the Disease
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dunser M, Hjortrup PB, Pettila V (2016) Vasopressors in shock: are we meeting our target and do we really understand what we are aiming at? Intensive Care Med 42:1176–1178. doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4269-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Magder SA (2014) The highs and lows of blood pressure: toward meaningful clinical targets in patients with shock. Crit Care Med 42:1241–1251. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lamontagne F, Cook DJ, Adhikari NK et al (2011) Vasopressor administration and sepsis: a survey of Canadian intensivists. J Crit Care 26(532):e531–537. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.01.005

    Google Scholar 

  4. St-Arnaud C, Éthier J-F, Hamielec C et al (2013) Prescribed targets for titration of vasopressors in septic shock: a retrospective cohort study. Can Med Assoc Open Access J 1:E127–E133F. doi:10.9778/cmajo.20130006

    Google Scholar 

  5. Koczmara CK, St-Arnaud C, Martinez HQ et al (2014) Vasopressor stewardship: a case report and lesson shared. Dynamics 25:26–29

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Asfar P, Meziani F, Hamel JF et al (2014) High versus low blood-pressure target in patients with septic shock. New Engl J Med. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1312173

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lamontagne F, Meade MO, Hebert PC et al (2016) Higher versus lower blood pressure targets for vasopressor therapy in shock: a multicentre pilot randomized controlled trial. Intensive Care Med 42:542–550. doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4237-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J et al (2008) Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. New Engl J Med 358:877–887

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schunemann H (2016) How to GRADE the evidence: imprecision. The Cochrane Collaboration/McMaster University, Hamilton

  10. Strandgaard S, Olesen J, Skinhoj E et al (1973) Autoregulation of brain circulation in severe arterial hypertension. Br Med J 1:507–510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Angus DC, Barnato AE, Bell D et al (2015) A systematic review and meta-analysis of early goal-directed therapy for septic shock: the ARISE, ProCESS and ProMISe Investigators. Intensive Care Med 41:1549–1560. doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3822-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francois Lamontagne.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lamontagne, F., Cohen, D. & Herridge, M. Understanding patient-centredness: contrasting expert versus patient perspectives on vasopressor therapy for shock. Intensive Care Med 43, 1052–1054 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4518-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4518-x

Keywords

Navigation