![]() Signal: The new test result is more accurate than our pre-test conceptualization of the patient.There are roughly three possible scenarios which may be imagined here: When we evaluate patients, we are continually integrating new data with our pre-conceived notion about what is going on with the patient: Understanding diagnostic tests: signal, noise, and bullshit. Therefore, available literature supports the concept that cvO2% cannot differentiate between septic and cardiogenic shock. Although cardiogenic shock typically causes low mvO2% values, a subset of patients does appear to exist with normal/elevated mvO2% values ( Edwards 1991)(4). It is well established in the literature that septic shock may be accompanied by low, normal, or high cvO2% values. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |