Tuyển tập các báo cáo nghiên cứu về y học được đăng trên tạp chí y học General Psychiatry cung cấp cho các bạn kiến thức về ngành y đề tài: Pro/con clinical debate: Are steroids useful in the management of patients with septic shock? | Available online http content 6 2 113 Commentary Pro con clinical debate Are steroids useful in the management of patients with septic shock Frank V Ritacca Carmine Simone1- Randy Wax fl Katherine G Craig and Keith R Walley Resident Department of Medicine University of Toronto Canada Resident Division of Thoracic Surgery University of Toronto Canada Resident Division of Critical Care Medicine Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto Canada Lecturer Department of Medicine University of Toronto Canada Staff Intensivist Division of Critical Care Medicine Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto Canada Fellow in Critical Care Medicine Division of Critical Care University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada Professor of Medicine Division of Critical Care University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada Correspondence Critical Care Forum Editorial Office editorial@ Published online 6 February 2002 Critical Care 2002 6 113-116 2002 BioMed Central Ltd Print ISSN 1364-8535 Online ISSN 1466-609X Abstract Decision-making in the intensive care unit is often very difficult. Although we are encouraged to make evidence-based decisions this may be difficult for a number of reasons. To begin with evidence may not exist to answer the clinical question. Second when there is evidence it may not be applicable to the patient in question or the clinician may be reluctant to apply it to the patient based on a number of secondary issues such as costs premorbid condition or possible complications. Finally emotions are often highly charged when caring for patients that have a significant chance of death and care-givers as well as families are frequently prepared to take chances on a therapy whose benefit is not entirely clear. Steroid use in septic shock is an example of a therapy that makes some sense but has conflicting support in the literature. In this issue of Critical Care Forum the two sides of this often heated debate are brought to the forefront in an interesting format. Keywords .
