Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 25 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 25 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 25 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 25 breaths/min.

Answer: D


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 76 bpm; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Respiratory rate ended at 25 breaths/min after a recent low of 16 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 80 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 132 mmHg.

Answer: C


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 18 breaths/min, with the latest value 11 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 15.7 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 72 bpm and MAP 92 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 18 breaths/min, with the latest value 11 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 15.7 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 150 mmHg and respiratory rate 11 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 18 breaths/min, with the latest value 11 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 15.7 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 72 bpm and MAP 92 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 18 breaths/min, with the latest value 11 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 15.7 K/uL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 150 mmHg with respiratory rate 11 breaths/min.

Answer: D


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. WBC ended at 13.2 K/uL after a recent low of 11.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 94 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 111 bpm.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. WBC ended at 13.2 K/uL after a recent low of 11.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 94 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 150 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. WBC ended at 13.2 K/uL after a recent low of 11.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 94 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 111 bpm.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. WBC ended at 13.2 K/uL after a recent low of 11.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 94 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 150 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the recent WBC reading was 3.7 K/uL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 21 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the recent WBC reading was 3.7 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 21 breaths/min.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 77 bpm, with the latest value 74 bpm; the recent WBC reading was 3.7 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 69 mmHg with heart rate 74 bpm.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 77 bpm, with the latest value 74 bpm; the recent WBC reading was 3.7 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 69 mmHg and heart rate 74 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 80 mmHg with heart rate 91 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 80 mmHg after a recent low of 61 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 98 mmHg and respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 80 mmHg after a recent low of 61 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 98 mmHg and respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 80 mmHg and heart rate 91 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. MAP recovered to 80 mmHg after a recent low of 61 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 98 mmHg and respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 91 bpm and MAP 80 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. MAP recovered to 80 mmHg after a recent low of 61 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 98 mmHg with respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20.8 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 91 bpm and MAP 80 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 24 breaths/min and 41 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 98 mmHg and respiratory rate 38 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 91%; MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 74 mmHg with heart rate 104 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Respiratory rate varied between 24 breaths/min and 41 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the most recent entries show systolic BP 98 mmHg and respiratory rate 38 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 91%; MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 74 mmHg and heart rate 104 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 89 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 104 bpm and MAP 74 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate varied between 24 breaths/min and 41 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 91%; the last snapshot shows MAP 74 mmHg with systolic BP 98 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 24 breaths/min and 41 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 91%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 74 mmHg and systolic BP 98 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; systolic BP recovered to 98 mmHg after a recent low of 89 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include heart rate 104 bpm and MAP 74 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 143 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 18 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 143 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 18 breaths/min.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 82 bpm.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 82 bpm.

Answer: C


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 143 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 82 bpm; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 143 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 82 bpm; the latest MAP is 102 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; the most recent entries show MAP 72 mmHg and systolic BP 101 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; the latest bedside set shows MAP 72 mmHg and systolic BP 101 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 72 mmHg with heart rate 81 bpm.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the current values include MAP 72 mmHg and heart rate 81 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the current values include MAP 72 mmHg and heart rate 81 bpm.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 101 mmHg with respiratory rate 16 breaths/min.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 101 mmHg and respiratory rate 16 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 72 mmHg and heart rate 81 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 81 bpm and MAP 72 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; WBC returned to 12 K/uL after reaching 17.5 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 81 bpm and MAP 72 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; the last snapshot shows MAP 72 mmHg with systolic BP 101 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 85% and 97%, with the latest value 96%; lactate was 2.4 mmol/L on the available recent reading; the latest bedside set shows MAP 72 mmHg and systolic BP 101 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate varied between 22 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 28 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 350 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show heart rate 71 bpm and MAP 71 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate varied between 22 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 28 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 350 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include heart rate 71 bpm and MAP 71 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 22 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 28 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 350 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 71 mmHg with systolic BP 110 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate varied between 22 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 28 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 350 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 110 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the most recent entries show MAP 93 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 93 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. The recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the latest MAP is 93 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 101 bpm.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. The recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the latest MAP is 93 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 101 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the last snapshot shows heart rate 101 bpm with MAP 93 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 101 bpm and MAP 93 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 25 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 20 breaths/min and 26 breaths/min, with the latest value 25 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 16 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 25 breaths/min.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the current values include MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 107 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 107 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 107 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 107 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 breaths/min.

Answer: C


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the most recent entries show heart rate 73 bpm and MAP 71 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 71 mmHg with systolic BP 107 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 107 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 76 bpm, with the latest value 73 bpm; the current values include heart rate 73 bpm and MAP 71 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Respiratory rate returned to 10 breaths/min after reaching 20 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 13.2 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 86 mmHg and systolic BP 144 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. The recent WBC reading was 13.2 K/uL; the latest MAP is 86 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 71 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate returned to 10 breaths/min after reaching 20 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 13.2 K/uL; the current values include MAP 86 mmHg and systolic BP 144 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. The recent WBC reading was 13.2 K/uL; the latest MAP is 86 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 71 bpm.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 varied between 88% and 97%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 98 bpm, with the latest value 92 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 113 mmHg and systolic BP 123 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 98 bpm, with the latest value 92 bpm; the recent WBC reading was 16.3 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 113 mmHg with heart rate 92 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 88% and 97%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 98 bpm, with the latest value 92 bpm; the most recent entries show MAP 113 mmHg and systolic BP 123 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 98 bpm, with the latest value 92 bpm; the recent WBC reading was 16.3 K/uL; the current values include MAP 113 mmHg and heart rate 92 bpm.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 87 mmHg with heart rate 86 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Respiratory rate varied between 11 breaths/min and 37 breaths/min, with the latest value 29 breaths/min; creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 87 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include MAP 87 mmHg and heart rate 86 bpm.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate varied between 11 breaths/min and 37 breaths/min, with the latest value 29 breaths/min; creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; the most recent entries show MAP 87 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show MAP 87 mmHg and heart rate 86 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Creatinine came back to 2.6 mg/dL after reaching 2.7 mg/dL; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 87 mmHg with heart rate 86 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate varied between 11 breaths/min and 37 breaths/min, with the latest value 29 breaths/min; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 29 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Respiratory rate varied between 11 breaths/min and 37 breaths/min, with the latest value 29 breaths/min; diastolic BP recovered to 69 mmHg after a recent low of 43 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 29 breaths/min.

Answer: A


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 0 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 62 mmHg and systolic BP 105 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 44 mmHg below 50 mmHg; heart rate ended at 74 bpm after a recent low of 50 bpm; the most recent entries show heart rate 74 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 44 mmHg below 50 mmHg; heart rate ended at 74 bpm after a recent low of 50 bpm; the current values include heart rate 74 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 0 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 62 mmHg with systolic BP 105 mmHg.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 88% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; the last snapshot shows MAP 87 mmHg with heart rate 65 bpm.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. MAP recovered to 87 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show MAP 87 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 88% and 100%, with the latest value 97%; the current values include MAP 87 mmHg and heart rate 65 bpm.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. MAP recovered to 87 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 87 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 81 bpm, with the latest value 65 bpm; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 21 breaths/min, with the latest value 18 breaths/min; the current values include heart rate 65 bpm and MAP 87 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. MAP recovered to 87 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 87 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 81 bpm, with the latest value 65 bpm; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 21 breaths/min, with the latest value 18 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 65 bpm and MAP 87 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 87 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 71 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 87 mmHg with systolic BP 138 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 82 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 139 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 82 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 53 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 82 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 139 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 82 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 53 bpm.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; creatinine was 2.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the last snapshot shows MAP 92 mmHg with heart rate 85 bpm.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the current values include MAP 92 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. SpO2 varied between 85% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 92 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; creatinine was 2.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the most recent entries show MAP 92 mmHg and heart rate 85 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Creatinine was 2.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 86 bpm, with the latest value 85 bpm; the most recent entries show heart rate 85 bpm and MAP 92 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 varied between 85% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 92 mmHg with systolic BP 142 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; urine output most recently reached 220 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 92 mmHg and systolic BP 142 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Creatinine was 2.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 86 bpm, with the latest value 85 bpm; the current values include heart rate 85 bpm and MAP 92 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 94 mmHg and systolic BP 111 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the current values include MAP 94 mmHg and heart rate 81 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; the most recent entries show MAP 94 mmHg and systolic BP 111 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the last snapshot shows MAP 94 mmHg with heart rate 81 bpm.

Answer: C


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the most recent entries show systolic BP 111 mmHg and respiratory rate 24 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the latest bedside set shows MAP 94 mmHg and heart rate 81 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the current values include systolic BP 111 mmHg and respiratory rate 24 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; the last snapshot shows MAP 94 mmHg with heart rate 81 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; WBC varied between 11.5 K/uL and 18.4 K/uL, with the latest value 12.6 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 81 bpm and MAP 94 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 94 mmHg with systolic BP 111 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 85%; urine output most recently reached 21 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 94 mmHg and systolic BP 111 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Lactate came back to 1.2 mmol/L after reaching 3.9 mmol/L; WBC varied between 11.5 K/uL and 18.4 K/uL, with the latest value 12.6 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 81 bpm and MAP 94 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 66 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 66 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show MAP 66 mmHg and systolic BP 119 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 66 mmHg and systolic BP 119 mmHg.

Answer: C


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 119 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 66 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 119 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 66 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 119 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 98 bpm and MAP 66 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 98 bpm and MAP 66 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 51 mmHg after a recent low of 41 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 119 mmHg with respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the most recent entries show MAP 62 mmHg and heart rate 82 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 110 mmHg and respiratory rate 26 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the current values include systolic BP 110 mmHg and respiratory rate 26 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows MAP 62 mmHg with heart rate 82 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the current values include heart rate 82 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 26 breaths/min after a recent low of 15 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 82 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 62 mmHg with systolic BP 110 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 62 mmHg and systolic BP 110 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 67 mmHg with heart rate 93 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the current values include MAP 67 mmHg and heart rate 93 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Urine output most recently reached 15 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 67 mmHg and systolic BP 107 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Urine output most recently reached 15 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; the most recent entries show MAP 67 mmHg and systolic BP 107 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Urine output most recently reached 15 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 107 mmHg and respiratory rate 24 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 67 mmHg and heart rate 93 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Urine output most recently reached 15 mL after low intervals down to 15 mL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the most recent entries show systolic BP 107 mmHg and respiratory rate 24 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Creatinine ended at 1.9 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; MAP recovered to 67 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 67 mmHg with heart rate 93 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 136 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 115 bpm; the latest MAP is 76 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 136 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 115 bpm; the latest MAP is 76 mmHg.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Respiratory rate ended at 27 breaths/min after a recent low of 12 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 75 mmHg with heart rate 93 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Respiratory rate ended at 27 breaths/min after a recent low of 12 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show MAP 75 mmHg and heart rate 93 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Systolic BP recovered to 89 mmHg after a recent low of 89 mmHg below 90 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 27 breaths/min after a recent low of 12 breaths/min; the current values include MAP 75 mmHg and systolic BP 89 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Systolic BP recovered to 89 mmHg after a recent low of 89 mmHg below 90 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 27 breaths/min after a recent low of 12 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 75 mmHg and systolic BP 89 mmHg.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 109 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 137 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 109 bpm.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 137 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 137 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 21 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Diastolic BP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 137 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 21 breaths/min.

Answer: C


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 120 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 135 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 120 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 96 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 120 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 135 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 120 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 96 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Creatinine was 5.7 mg/dL on the available recent reading; SpO2 varied between 85% and 96%, with the latest value 93%; the current values include systolic BP 101 mmHg and respiratory rate 16 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Creatinine was 5.7 mg/dL on the available recent reading; SpO2 varied between 85% and 96%, with the latest value 93%; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 101 mmHg with respiratory rate 16 breaths/min.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Systolic BP recovered to 101 mmHg after a recent low of 85 mmHg below 90 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 47 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 83 bpm and MAP 60 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Systolic BP recovered to 101 mmHg after a recent low of 85 mmHg below 90 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 47 mmHg after a recent low of 47 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 83 bpm and MAP 60 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 89 mmHg with heart rate 96 bpm.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Respiratory rate varied between 29 breaths/min and 39 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 150 mmHg and respiratory rate 38 breaths/min.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Respiratory rate varied between 29 breaths/min and 39 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 150 mmHg and respiratory rate 38 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the most recent entries show MAP 89 mmHg and heart rate 96 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Respiratory rate varied between 29 breaths/min and 39 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the last snapshot shows MAP 89 mmHg with systolic BP 150 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 96 bpm and MAP 89 mmHg.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Respiratory rate varied between 29 breaths/min and 39 breaths/min, with the latest value 38 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 89 mmHg and systolic BP 150 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. SpO2 varied between 91% and 94%, with the latest value 93%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 96 bpm and MAP 89 mmHg.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Systolic BP recovered to 102 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 102 mmHg and respiratory rate 21 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. SpO2 came back to 92% after reaching 96%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 71 mmHg with heart rate 98 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Systolic BP recovered to 102 mmHg after a recent low of 83 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the current values include systolic BP 102 mmHg and respiratory rate 21 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 came back to 92% after reaching 96%; the recent WBC reading was 14.1 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 71 mmHg and heart rate 98 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 54 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the most recent entries show systolic BP 104 mmHg and respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the current values include MAP 62 mmHg and heart rate 91 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 54 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 104 mmHg with respiratory rate 22 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 62 mmHg and heart rate 91 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 54 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 62 mmHg and systolic BP 104 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the current values include heart rate 91 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 90% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; the most recent entries show heart rate 91 bpm and MAP 62 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 62 mmHg after a recent low of 54 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 48 mmHg after a recent low of 38 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 62 mmHg with systolic BP 104 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 96%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 111 bpm, with the latest value 104 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 143 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Creatinine was 2.1 mg/dL on the available recent reading; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 111 bpm, with the latest value 104 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 101 mmHg and heart rate 104 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. SpO2 varied between 85% and 96%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 111 bpm, with the latest value 104 bpm; the most recent entries show systolic BP 143 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 breaths/min.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Creatinine was 2.1 mg/dL on the available recent reading; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 111 bpm, with the latest value 104 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 101 mmHg with heart rate 104 bpm.

Answer: B


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 38 mmHg after a recent low of 31 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 91% after dropping as low as 80%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 38 mmHg and systolic BP 52 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Urine output most recently reached 27 mL after low intervals down to 27 mL; creatinine was 2.2 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the current values include heart rate 55 bpm and MAP 38 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. MAP recovered to 38 mmHg after a recent low of 31 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 91% after dropping as low as 80%; the last snapshot shows MAP 38 mmHg with systolic BP 52 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. Urine output most recently reached 27 mL after low intervals down to 27 mL; creatinine was 2.2 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the most recent entries show heart rate 55 bpm and MAP 38 mmHg.

Answer: B


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 114 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 breaths/min.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 85 bpm; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 85 bpm; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 114 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 breaths/min.

Answer: A


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. Diastolic BP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 22 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 19 breaths/min after a recent low of 10 breaths/min; the current values include heart rate 52 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 varied between 60% and 77%, with the latest value 61%; diastolic BP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 22 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 82 mmHg and systolic BP 115 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Diastolic BP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 22 mmHg below 50 mmHg; respiratory rate ended at 19 breaths/min after a recent low of 10 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 52 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. SpO2 varied between 60% and 77%, with the latest value 61%; diastolic BP recovered to 74 mmHg after a recent low of 22 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 82 mmHg with systolic BP 115 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; the most recent entries show MAP 76 mmHg and systolic BP 114 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 76 mmHg with heart rate 89 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 76 mmHg and systolic BP 114 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the current values include MAP 76 mmHg and heart rate 89 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
Given the current observations, what is the next monitoring step: escalation or continued standard monitoring?

Options:
A. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the most recent entries show systolic BP 114 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 76 mmHg with heart rate 89 bpm.
C. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 114 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. SpO2 varied between 85% and 95%, with the latest value 94%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 76 mmHg and heart rate 89 bpm.

Answer: D


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 114 mmHg with respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. Urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the recent WBC reading was 19.3 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 89 bpm and MAP 76 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. MAP recovered to 76 mmHg after a recent low of 57 mmHg below 65 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 106 bpm, with the latest value 89 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 114 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 breaths/min.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. Urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the recent WBC reading was 19.3 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 89 bpm and MAP 76 mmHg.

Answer: A


Question:
Based on the observed ICU data so far, choose the next monitoring step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; the most recent entries show MAP 82 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; systolic BP recovered to 138 mmHg after a recent low of 76 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include MAP 82 mmHg and heart rate 99 bpm.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 82 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; systolic BP recovered to 138 mmHg after a recent low of 76 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 82 mmHg with heart rate 99 bpm.

Answer: A


Question:
From the available ICU observations, decide whether to escalate monitoring now or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: More frequent checks are reasonable for now. Closer checks help confirm that the apparent recovery holds over the next interval. Diastolic BP recovered to 59 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
B. Continue standard monitoring for now: The current cadence is reasonable for now. The latest values are stable, and the earlier abnormality is not paired with another current decline. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; systolic BP recovered to 138 mmHg after a recent low of 76 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 138 mmHg and respiratory rate 18 breaths/min.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: Routine bedside checks are reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading can be watched at the usual cadence while the bedside values remain steady. Diastolic BP recovered to 59 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
D. Escalate monitoring now: Closer bedside trending is reasonable for the next interval. The abnormal reading is paired with another signal from the same period. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; systolic BP recovered to 138 mmHg after a recent low of 76 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 138 mmHg with respiratory rate 18 breaths/min.

Answer: D


Question:
Using the observations up to now, select the appropriate next step: escalate monitoring or continue standard monitoring.

Options:
A. Escalate monitoring now: Closer monitoring is reasonable for the next interval. The concern is that the latest numbers look better but still follow a recent threshold breach. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 82 mmHg and systolic BP 138 mmHg.
B. Escalate monitoring now: A higher monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. The recent window has more than one warning sign, so closer checks are reasonable. Diastolic BP recovered to 59 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
C. Continue standard monitoring for now: The standard monitoring level is reasonable here. The last values do not show a pattern that calls for tighter checks. Diastolic BP recovered to 59 mmHg after a recent low of 46 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the recent WBC reading was 20 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 82 mmHg.
D. Continue standard monitoring for now: No change in monitoring cadence is reasonable for now. Routine monitoring is reasonable while the current bedside picture is not worsening. MAP recovered to 82 mmHg after a recent low of 60 mmHg below 65 mmHg; SpO2 ended at 100% after dropping as low as 88%; the last snapshot shows MAP 82 mmHg with systolic BP 138 mmHg.

Answer: B