A315 A QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE ADEQUACY OF FLUID REPLACEMENT THERAPY FOR PATIENTS DIAGNOSED WITH ACUTE PANCREATITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background For acute pancreatitis (AP), aggressive fluid resuscitation therapy (FRT) is the cornerstone for initial management. However, results from the recent WATERFALL study show a higher incidence of fluid overload with aggressive FRT (bolus of 20 ml/kg followed by infusion of 3 ml/kg/hr of Ringer’s lactate [RL]) compared with moderate FRT (infusion of 1.5 ml/kg/hr RL preceded by a bolus of 10 ml/kg only in those with hypovolemia). Given this evidence, we conducted a study to assess whether patients with AP received appropriate fluid therapy and monitoring at our institution. Aims To assess whether fluid replacement therapy in patients with AP was aligned with updated clinical practice at our centre. Methods We completed a chart audit of all adult (≥ 18 years old) patients who presented to the ED from April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2022 and were diagnosed with AP. Patients were identified based on ICD-10 codes for a primary admission or discharge diagnosis of AP. Data variables collected included demographic information, cause of AP, comorbidities, laboratory tests, type and volume of fluids replaced, urine output, complications, and hospital length of stay (HLOS). Severity of AP was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe based on the revised Atlanta classification of AP. Descriptive statistics were completed. Results A total of 250 patients (121 F, 129 M), mean age 53±19 years (range 19-96 years) were diagnosed with AP. Body weight was not available for 4 patients and thus excluded from this analysis. FRT variables stratified for the severity of AP are below in Table 1. Conclusions Our quality assessment has identified a knowledge-to-practice gap in the use of FRT for patients with AP. To assist physicians in the decision-making process, we have developed an algorithm to improve FRT in AP. This will be implemented via an order set to standardize the amount of FRT and to improve monitoring of urine output. This algorithm will be tested using an improvement science approach in collaboration with healthcare professionals. Table 1. Summary of fluid management in AP patients as stratified by severity of disease. Funding Agencies None
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".