BURN question re: IV narcotics

  1. Hey all!

    I was asked a question on the "Introductions" forum that kind of stumped me. I was hoping you could help us both out.

    Here's the question:


    "We had our review class for the licensure exams and they have this question:
    A narcotic IV was orderd to control the pain of the client with burns. Why was the IV route selected?

    a. Burns cause excruciating pain, requiring immediate relief.
    b. Circulatory blood volume is reduced, delaying absorption form the subcutaneous tissues and muscle tissue
    c. Cardiac function is enhanced by immediate action of the drug
    d. Metabolism of the drug would be delayed because of decreased insulin production.

    my answer was A, and I also came across this question on a review class. but when this question came up at our school review, their answer was B. My answer was still A, because B mainly refers to the IM and not IV.what do you think is the right answer. Two review instructors have different answer and i am confused. One question is important for me. can you please give some explanations on this or the rationale!!!! everybody is welcome!"

    Thank you very very much for your help!
    •  
  2. 17 Comments

  3. by   shyone2005
    is the question why iv route was not selected??
    Last edit by shyone2005 on Sep 23, '05
  4. by   Liddle Noodnik
    Quote from shyone2005
    is the question why iv route was not selected??

    Her question was, why WAS the IV route selected.
  5. by   nursemomruns
    Quote from zoeboboey
    Her question was, why WAS the IV route selected.
    The correct answer is B. You shouldn't give IMs and SQ to burn patients. Basically, you are being asked why you ruled out IM and SQ. It's not a very well-written question.
  6. by   sirI
    Quote from zoeboboey

    ...... IV was ordered to control the pain of the client with burns. Why was the IV route selected?


    Circulatory blood volume is reduced, delaying absorption from the subcutaneous tissues and muscle tissue
    .
    Hello, zoeboboey,

    The question read that an IV was ordered and why. The best answer to support the rationale of ordering the pain med IV is that to give it IM or SQ, absorption would be delayed due to decreased circulatory volume.

    Hope this clears it up for you.
    Last edit by sirI on Sep 23, '05 : Reason: copyright laws
  7. by   suzanne4
    Hate to throw this in, but copying a question in its entirety here, including all four of the answers, is against US copyright laws. That question belongs to who ever the author was, and without their permission, cannot be reproduced here.

    Please be careful with this.............
  8. by   sirI
    Quote from suzanne4
    Hate to throw this in, but copying a question in its entirety here, including all four of the answers, is against US copyright laws. That question belongs to who ever the author was, and without their permission, cannot be reproduced here.

    Please be careful with this.............
    OOPS! :imbar Sorry, I was caught up in the question and forgot copyright laws. Thanks, suzanne for setting us straight.
  9. by   gwenith
    Sorry I would have picked

    E) there may not BE any sc or Im area unaffected by the burn

    But then most of my experience has been with the big burns. Have had to give IV heparin before today as there just was NOWHERE for an SC injection site.
  10. by   Liddle Noodnik
    Quote from suzanne4
    Hate to throw this in, but copying a question in its entirety here, including all four of the answers, is against US copyright laws. That question belongs to who ever the author was, and without their permission, cannot be reproduced here.

    Please be careful with this.............

    Hi, never thought of that. Do you want to delete the thread? Thanks Suzanne!
  11. by   MissRN0520
    Quote from suzanne4
    Hate to throw this in, but copying a question in its entirety here, including all four of the answers, is against US copyright laws. That question belongs to who ever the author was, and without their permission, cannot be reproduced here.

    Please be careful with this.............
    Thanks suzzanne for reminding us. the question came from me and zoeboboey was helping me out, thanks for reminding us and my apologies again.
  12. by   MissRN0520
    Quote from siri
    Hello, zoeboboey,

    The question read that an IV was ordered and why. The best answer to support the rationale of ordering the pain med IV is that to give it IM or SQ, absorption would be delayed due to decreased circulatory volume.

    Hope this clears it up for you.
    hi!i was the one who posted the question from a review, i have no idea who was the author of that question or from what book it was based.can you give us tips on how to answer such questions because it is quite confusing. gonna take nclex and some more exams in a couple of months (i am praying! and working on it :angel2: ) as early as now, i am preparing for it. i am wondering how am i going to attack question since, my answer was A.direct answer to the question, i would've answered B if the quuestion was 'why was not IM or SC given?". still confused on how to answer. help us students! thanks and God bless!
  13. by   gwenith
    The most correct answer is B but I would argue the physiology underlying even that answer because it soooo depends on the size of the burn and the degree of resuscitation.

    The most correct response would be interrupted/diminished blood flow to SC/IM sites.
  14. by   Liddle Noodnik
    Quote from gwenith
    The most correct answer is B but I would argue the physiology underlying even that answer because it soooo depends on the size of the burn and the degree of resuscitation.

    The most correct response would be interrupted/diminished blood flow to SC/IM sites.

    Thanks, that is what I was thinking - if it was 3rd degree burns over a majority of the body, versus second degree over a small area, it would make a big difference.

    Thanks for taking the time!

close