"The Use of Early Hypothermia in the Treatment of Traumatic Brain Injuries" is a perfect example of a paper on the cardiovascular system. PICOT is a method used to establish a question for clinical research. PICOT stands for a population of patients, issue or intervention, comparison with another issue or intervention, outcome, and time. The PICOT method is utilized to give a reliable way of ascertaining elements in clinical practice. The PICOT question I have developed is, in the adult population (population), how does induced hypothermia (intervention or issue) compare to nonhypothermia interventions (comparison) preserve the vital organs (outcome) during the first 24 hours after insult?
I have selected this question because induced hypothermia has been applied to lessen the risk of injury to vital organs in the body after a phase of inadequate flow of blood. In addition, several studies undertaken indicate that patients facing a risk of injuries on the brain have a greater chance of survival when treated by a hypothermia procedure than those patients who use nonhypothermia intervention (Mayer & Sessler, 2004). The rationale of employing induced hypothermia as a neuroprotectant concentrates on reducing the speed of cellular metabolism that results from a decrease in body temperature.
In addition, these hypotheses imply that induced hypothermia lessens the damaging impacts of ischemia by diminishing the oxygen needed by the body. There seems to be a straightforward association between the impact of induced hypothermia and the degree of decrease in body temperature. Moreover, studies have indicated the advantage that induced hypothermia has over nonhypothermia interventions during distressing central nervous system injuries (Arcure & Harrison, 2009). Attaining temperatures of about 33 degrees are contemplated to avert resultant neurological damages after a grave central nervous system trauma. In another study involving induced hypothermia and nonhypothermia intervention, patients were cooled for 24 hours, with a temperature of between 32-34 degrees.
More than 50% of the patients who used induced hypothermia experienced results that were favorable. This is in comparison to less than 40% of patients who employed a nonhypothermia intervention or standard care. Another report indicates that not more than 10% of about 300,000 American adults who experience cardiac arrest every year live on for a sufficient time after leaving the hospital.
This is, despite, improved employment of procedures, for example, enhancements in methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, quicker emergency units, and setting up defibrillators that are automatic at all public areas. Nonetheless, over 50% of patients treated by the use of induced hypothermia have survived (Holden, 2006). In conclusion, induced hypothermia has been perceived to be more essential in preserving vital body organs than nonhypothermia interventions in adults. Induced hypothermia has been used for comatose cardiac arrest survivors. Physicians use their knowledge on reducing the patient’ s body temperature to prevent brain injury.
For example, cardiac surgeons use induced hypothermia for the duration of heart surgery to decrease the metabolism in the body and lessen the damage of key organs in the body all through durations of insignificant or no flow of blood. In induced hypothermia, once the sick person is revived, and blood circulation returns to normal, the restitution of the flow of blood to key body organs takes place (Holden, 2006).
Arcure, J., & Harrison, E. (2009). Review article of the use of early hypothermia in the treatment of traumatic brain injuries. JSOM Summer, 10(1), 10.
Holden, M. (2006). Clinically induced hypothermia: Why chill your patient? Advanced Critical Care, 17(2), 125-132.
Mayer, S. A., & Sessler, D. I. (2004). Therapeutic hypothermia. New York: Informa Healthcare.