Measuring and Monitoring ICP in Neurocritical Care: Results from a National Practice Survey
- 956 Downloads
The use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitors is nearly synonymous with Neurocritical Care. Recent studies in nursing literature have report high levels of practice variance associated with ICP monitoring and treatment. There are no recent practice surveys to describe how critical care physicians and nurses who are familiar with ICP management provide care to their patients.
A short survey was developed and disseminated electronically to the members of the Neurocritical Care Society.
The summary from 241 professionals provides evidence that there is significant practice variation associated with ICP monitoring and management.
The results highlight the need to develop standardized approaches to measuring, monitoring, recording, and treating ICP.
KeywordsIntracranial pressure monitoring ICP Documentation Critical care Standard practice
- 2.Greenberg MS. Handbook of neurosurgery. 5th ed. Lakeland, FL: Thieme; 2001.Google Scholar
- 3.Greenberg MS, Arredondo N. Handbook of neurosurgery. 6th ed. Lakeland, FL: Greenberg Graphics; Thieme Medical Publishers; 2006.Google Scholar
- 9.Olson DM, Lewis LL, Bader MK, et al. Significant practice pattern variations associated with intracranial pressure monitoring. J Neurosci Nurs. 2013;45(4):186–93.Google Scholar
- 17.Marmarou A, Anderson RL, Ward JD, et al. NINDS traumatic coma data bank: intracranial pressure monitoring methodology. J Neurosurg. 1992;75(November):S21–7.Google Scholar
- 22.AANN. AANN Core curriculum for neuroscience nursing. 4th ed. St. Louis, Mo.: Saunders; 2004.Google Scholar
- 23.March K, Madden L. Intracranial pressure management. In: Littlejohns LR, Bader MK, editors. AACN-AANN protocols for practice: monitoring technologies in critically ill neuroscience patients. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2009.Google Scholar
- 25.Hunter KM. Electronic health records. In: Englebardt SP, Nelson R, editors. Health care informatics an interdisciplinary approach. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002. p. 209–30.Google Scholar