Conflict with preceptor over re-checking blood glucose - page 2
I have started at a new facility. I am not a new nurse, just new to the facility. A patient had a very high blood sugar. I had never seen the BS this high for the patient. I rechecked it to make sure it was not a false high, but... Read More
- 0Apr 11 by delphine22I recheck, and on the other hand.
All hospital juices are formulated to each have 15g carbs in 120 mls/4 oz. In real life, grape juice is the sugariest of fruit juices (more than orange) but as long as you've got your 15g in, it doesn't matter what you use, of course except for the renals. Last place I worked, where I would write "FS AC/HS" on the diet part of the pt whiteboard, I would make sure to write "No orange juice!" if they were renal, because the techs will just run and grab juice if someone is low (calling me at the same time) and I want them to know.
- 3Apr 11 by toomuchbaloney1) Agree to disagree with your preceptor on this.
2) Double check your facility policy but always err on the side of making certain that you are not treating a patient for equipment or test failure. Imagine resuscitating a patient because their monitor lead was disconnected...treating a falsely high or low lab because of user or product failure is the same thing. Especially if the appearance of the patient does not support the result you are seeing.
3) Understand that thinking critically rather than performing tasks by rote is what differentiates professional nurses from other unlicensed technicians.
4) remember that you will be held accountable for what you did or did not do. If something untoward were to happen you would be held to the standards expected from a properly educated and licensed RN, regardless of what the preceptor told you.
- 0Apr 13 by systolysorry folks, but simply re checking with the same glucometer makes no sense, unless
you suspect problems with the technique such as poor site preparation or drop size
given that one has verified the device has been properly calibrated, why would you use
the same device you suspect to have given a false reading
i don't disagree with getting a second reading per se, but why would you do the same exact thing
twice when you suspect something went wrong the first time