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 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 106 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 26 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. Respiratory rate varied between 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 58 bpm; the latest MAP is 73 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 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 58 bpm; the latest MAP is 73 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. Respiratory rate varied between 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest systolic BP is 106 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 26 breaths/min.

Answer: A


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 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 73 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 106 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 varied between 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 73 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 106 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 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 58 bpm; the latest MAP is 73 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 17 breaths/min and 30 breaths/min, with the latest value 26 breaths/min; the latest heart rate is 58 bpm; the latest MAP is 73 mmHg.

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. Creatinine was 2.2 mg/dL on the available recent reading; WBC ended at 15.9 K/uL after a recent low of 13.7 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 29 bpm and MAP 60 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. MAP recovered to 60 mmHg after a recent low of 55 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 20 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 86 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. MAP recovered to 60 mmHg after a recent low of 55 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 20 mL after low intervals down to 0 mL; the current values include systolic BP 86 mmHg and respiratory rate 16 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. Creatinine was 2.2 mg/dL on the available recent reading; WBC ended at 15.9 K/uL after a recent low of 13.7 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 29 bpm and MAP 60 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. 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 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows MAP 65 mmHg with heart rate 68 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. Heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the current values include MAP 65 mmHg and heart rate 68 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 97% after dropping as low as 88%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; the most recent entries show MAP 65 mmHg and systolic BP 94 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 ended at 97% after dropping as low as 88%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 65 mmHg and systolic BP 94 mmHg.

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 ended at 97% after dropping as low as 88%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 65 mmHg with systolic BP 94 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 varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; systolic BP recovered to 94 mmHg after a recent low of 94 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 68 bpm and MAP 65 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 97% after dropping as low as 88%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 70 bpm, with the latest value 68 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 65 mmHg and systolic BP 94 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 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; systolic BP recovered to 94 mmHg after a recent low of 94 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include heart rate 68 bpm and MAP 65 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. The recent WBC reading was 33.7 K/uL; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the current values include systolic BP 97 mmHg and respiratory rate 10 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 2.4 mg/dL on the available recent reading; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 74 mmHg and heart rate 96 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. The recent WBC reading was 33.7 K/uL; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the most recent entries show systolic BP 97 mmHg and respiratory rate 10 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 2.4 mg/dL on the available recent reading; respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows MAP 74 mmHg with heart rate 96 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. Respiratory rate varied between 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; systolic BP recovered to 97 mmHg after a recent low of 97 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 96 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 9 breaths/min and 16 breaths/min, with the latest value 10 breaths/min; systolic BP recovered to 97 mmHg after a recent low of 97 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include heart rate 96 bpm and MAP 74 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. The recent WBC reading was 33.7 K/uL; creatinine was 2.4 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the latest bedside set shows MAP 74 mmHg and systolic BP 97 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 33.7 K/uL; creatinine was 2.4 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the last snapshot shows MAP 74 mmHg with systolic BP 97 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. SpO2 varied between 85% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 64 mmHg with heart rate 95 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 64 mmHg after a recent low of 63 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 90 mmHg and respiratory rate 27 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. SpO2 varied between 85% and 98%, with the latest value 96%; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 64 mmHg and heart rate 95 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. MAP recovered to 64 mmHg after a recent low of 63 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the current values include systolic BP 90 mmHg and respiratory rate 27 breaths/min.

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 22 breaths/min and 29 breaths/min, with the latest value 27 breaths/min; WBC ended at 20.4 K/uL after a recent low of 14.6 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 95 bpm and MAP 64 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. MAP recovered to 64 mmHg after a recent low of 63 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 90 mmHg with respiratory rate 27 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 22 breaths/min and 29 breaths/min, with the latest value 27 breaths/min; WBC ended at 20.4 K/uL after a recent low of 14.6 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 95 bpm and MAP 64 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 64 mmHg after a recent low of 63 mmHg below 65 mmHg; urine output most recently reached 40 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; the current values include systolic BP 90 mmHg and respiratory rate 27 breaths/min.

Answer: B


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 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 75 mmHg and systolic BP 122 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. Urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 75 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 76 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 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 75 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 76 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. Respiratory rate returned to 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show MAP 75 mmHg and systolic BP 122 mmHg.

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 returned to 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show heart rate 76 bpm and MAP 75 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 returned to 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include systolic BP 122 mmHg and respiratory rate 5 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. Respiratory rate returned to 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 76 bpm and MAP 75 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 returned to 5 breaths/min after reaching 21 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 122 mmHg with respiratory rate 5 breaths/min.

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 ended at 98% after dropping as low as 88%; creatinine was 1.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 149 mmHg and respiratory rate 13 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. The recent WBC reading was 50.1 K/uL; creatinine was 1.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the last snapshot shows MAP 86 mmHg with heart rate 113 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. The recent WBC reading was 50.1 K/uL; creatinine was 1.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the most recent entries show MAP 86 mmHg and heart rate 113 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 ended at 98% after dropping as low as 88%; creatinine was 1.8 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the current values include systolic BP 149 mmHg and respiratory rate 13 breaths/min.

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. The recent WBC reading was 12.2 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 106 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 18 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. The recent WBC reading was 12.2 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 106 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 18 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. The recent WBC reading was 12.2 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 91 bpm; the latest MAP is 67 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. The recent WBC reading was 12.2 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 91 bpm; the latest MAP is 67 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. The recent WBC reading was 42.7 K/uL; creatinine was 2.3 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the most recent entries show MAP 76 mmHg and heart rate 107 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. The recent WBC reading was 42.7 K/uL; creatinine was 2.3 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the last snapshot shows MAP 76 mmHg with heart rate 107 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 100 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; creatinine was 2.3 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 96 mmHg and respiratory rate 14 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. Urine output most recently reached 100 mL after low intervals down to 20 mL; creatinine was 2.3 mg/dL on the available recent reading; the current values include systolic BP 96 mmHg and respiratory rate 14 breaths/min.

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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest systolic BP is 113 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 129 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 129 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 ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest systolic BP is 113 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 21 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 113 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest heart rate is 129 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 113 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. Heart rate ended at 129 bpm after a recent low of 80 bpm; the latest heart rate is 129 bpm; the latest MAP is 88 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. 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 98%; WBC returned to 1 K/uL after reaching 6 K/uL; the last snapshot shows MAP 77 mmHg with heart rate 58 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 61 bpm, with the latest value 58 bpm; SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the most recent entries show MAP 77 mmHg and systolic BP 121 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 98%; WBC returned to 1 K/uL after reaching 6 K/uL; the current values include MAP 77 mmHg and heart rate 58 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 61 bpm, with the latest value 58 bpm; SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 77 mmHg and systolic BP 121 mmHg.

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. SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; WBC returned to 1 K/uL after reaching 6 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 58 bpm and MAP 77 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 61 bpm, with the latest value 58 bpm; SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 77 mmHg and systolic BP 121 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 98%; WBC returned to 1 K/uL after reaching 6 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 58 bpm and MAP 77 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 61 bpm, with the latest value 58 bpm; SpO2 varied between 85% and 100%, with the latest value 98%; the last snapshot shows MAP 77 mmHg with systolic BP 121 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 140 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 72 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 140 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 72 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 72 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 140 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 20 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 systolic BP is 140 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 20 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 87 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 72 bpm.

Answer: A


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 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest MAP is 90 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 42 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the current values include MAP 90 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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. SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest MAP is 90 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 42 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 90 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest MAP is 90 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 42 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the current values include systolic BP 134 mmHg and respiratory rate 19 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the most recent entries show systolic BP 134 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 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest MAP is 90 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 42 bpm.

Answer: A


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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 90 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the most recent entries show heart rate 42 bpm and MAP 90 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the current values include heart rate 42 bpm and MAP 90 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. Heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 58 bpm, with the latest value 42 bpm; SpO2 varied between 90% and 99%, with the latest value 98%; the last snapshot shows MAP 90 mmHg with systolic BP 134 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. Respiratory rate returned to 16 breaths/min after reaching 41 breaths/min; diastolic BP recovered to 53 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 66 mmHg and heart rate 61 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. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 59 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 53 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 96 mmHg and respiratory rate 16 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 returned to 16 breaths/min after reaching 41 breaths/min; diastolic BP recovered to 53 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows MAP 66 mmHg with heart rate 61 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. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 59 mmHg below 65 mmHg; diastolic BP recovered to 53 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show systolic BP 96 mmHg and respiratory rate 16 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. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 59 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate returned to 16 breaths/min after reaching 41 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows MAP 66 mmHg with systolic BP 96 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. Systolic BP recovered to 96 mmHg after a recent low of 90 mmHg below 90 mmHg; WBC returned to 14.3 K/uL after reaching 15.3 K/uL; the current values include heart rate 61 bpm and MAP 66 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. MAP recovered to 66 mmHg after a recent low of 59 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate returned to 16 breaths/min after reaching 41 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 66 mmHg and systolic BP 96 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. Systolic BP recovered to 96 mmHg after a recent low of 90 mmHg below 90 mmHg; WBC returned to 14.3 K/uL after reaching 15.3 K/uL; the most recent entries show heart rate 61 bpm and MAP 66 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. Systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 77 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 88% and 100%, with the latest value 95%; systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the most recent entries show MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 99 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 88% and 100%, with the latest value 95%; systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 71 mmHg and systolic BP 99 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 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 77 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 varied between 88% and 100%, with the latest value 95%; systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 99 mmHg and respiratory rate 13 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. Systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 77 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 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 77 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 88% and 100%, with the latest value 95%; systolic BP recovered to 99 mmHg after a recent low of 99 mmHg below 90 mmHg; the most recent entries show systolic BP 99 mmHg and respiratory rate 13 breaths/min.

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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include MAP 109 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. Urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 109 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 126 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 109 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 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 109 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 126 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. Urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 109 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 126 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 14 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 ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 14 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 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest MAP is 109 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 126 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 126 bpm and MAP 109 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 142 mmHg with respiratory rate 14 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include systolic BP 142 mmHg and respiratory rate 14 breaths/min.
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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show heart rate 126 bpm and MAP 109 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 ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 109 mmHg with systolic BP 142 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 109 mmHg and systolic BP 142 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 ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the most recent entries show heart rate 126 bpm and MAP 109 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. Heart rate ended at 126 bpm after a recent low of 110 bpm; urine output most recently reached 30 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the current values include heart rate 126 bpm and MAP 109 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 69 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 109 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 69 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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 69 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 109 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 69 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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 varied between 88% and 98%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the most recent entries show systolic BP 136 mmHg and respiratory rate 10 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 40 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 64 mmHg and heart rate 101 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 40 mmHg after a recent low of 40 mmHg below 50 mmHg; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 64 mmHg with heart rate 101 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 88% and 98%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 136 mmHg and respiratory rate 10 breaths/min.

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. MAP recovered to 64 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate returned to 10 breaths/min after reaching 26 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 101 bpm and MAP 64 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. SpO2 varied between 88% and 98%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 136 mmHg with respiratory rate 10 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. MAP recovered to 64 mmHg after a recent low of 64 mmHg below 65 mmHg; respiratory rate returned to 10 breaths/min after reaching 26 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 101 bpm and MAP 64 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. SpO2 varied between 88% and 98%, with the latest value 97%; heart rate varied between 50 bpm and 103 bpm, with the latest value 101 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 136 mmHg and respiratory rate 10 breaths/min.

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 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 76 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 76 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the most recent entries show MAP 76 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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. Respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 76 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the current values include systolic BP 134 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 came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 134 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 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 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 76 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 98 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 varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest MAP is 76 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the current values include systolic BP 134 mmHg and respiratory rate 15 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 came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 98 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 134 mmHg with respiratory rate 15 breaths/min.
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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 98 bpm and MAP 76 mmHg.

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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 76 mmHg and systolic BP 134 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the last snapshot shows MAP 76 mmHg with systolic BP 134 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. Creatinine came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the most recent entries show heart rate 98 bpm and MAP 76 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 came back to 3.5 mg/dL after reaching 3.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate varied between 10 breaths/min and 20 breaths/min, with the latest value 15 breaths/min; the current values include heart rate 98 bpm and MAP 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 141 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 141 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 88 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 141 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 17 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 141 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 17 breaths/min.

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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 67 bpm; the latest MAP is 95 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest heart rate is 67 bpm; the latest MAP is 95 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 153 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 breaths/min.
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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 153 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 19 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. 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 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows MAP 67 mmHg and systolic BP 112 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 67 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 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 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show MAP 67 mmHg and systolic BP 112 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 67 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 bpm.

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. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 67 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 67 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 breaths/min.

Answer: C


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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the current values include systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the last snapshot shows heart rate 75 bpm with MAP 67 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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the most recent entries show heart rate 75 bpm and MAP 67 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. Urine output most recently reached 25 mL after low intervals down to 25 mL; diastolic BP recovered to 49 mmHg after a recent low of 49 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 112 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 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. Heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 123 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the most recent entries show MAP 83 mmHg and systolic BP 120 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. Heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 123 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 83 mmHg and systolic BP 120 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 120 mmHg and respiratory rate 30 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the most recent entries show systolic BP 120 mmHg and respiratory rate 30 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. Heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 123 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. Heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest MAP is 83 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 123 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 123 bpm and MAP 83 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 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the most recent entries show heart rate 123 bpm and MAP 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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 120 mmHg and respiratory rate 30 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 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 120 mmHg with respiratory rate 30 breaths/min.

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. Respiratory rate varied between 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the last snapshot shows MAP 83 mmHg with systolic BP 120 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 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the most recent entries show heart rate 123 bpm and MAP 83 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 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the current values include heart rate 123 bpm and MAP 83 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 23 breaths/min and 31 breaths/min, with the latest value 30 breaths/min; heart rate ended at 123 bpm after a recent low of 109 bpm; the latest bedside set shows MAP 83 mmHg and systolic BP 120 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 88% and 100%, with the latest value 99%; heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 66 bpm, with the latest value 57 bpm; the current values include systolic BP 124 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 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 88% and 100%, with the latest value 99%; heart rate varied between 40 bpm and 66 bpm, with the latest value 57 bpm; the latest bedside set shows systolic BP 124 mmHg and respiratory rate 20 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 40 bpm and 66 bpm, with the latest value 57 bpm; the latest MAP is 97 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 57 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 40 bpm and 66 bpm, with the latest value 57 bpm; the latest MAP is 97 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 57 bpm.

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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest MAP is 98 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 155 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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest MAP is 98 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 155 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 15.1 K/uL; the latest MAP is 98 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 70 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 15.1 K/uL; the latest MAP is 98 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 70 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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 70 bpm; the latest MAP is 98 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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 155 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 17 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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 155 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 17 breaths/min.
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. The recent WBC reading was 15.1 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 70 bpm; the latest MAP is 98 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. Urine output most recently reached 45 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the recent WBC reading was 12.6 K/uL; the current values include MAP 73 mmHg and systolic BP 125 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 12.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 73 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 69 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. Urine output most recently reached 45 mL after low intervals down to 30 mL; the recent WBC reading was 12.6 K/uL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 73 mmHg and systolic BP 125 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 12.6 K/uL; the latest MAP is 73 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 69 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 24 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 24 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 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 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 24 breaths/min.
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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 24 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 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 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest MAP is 71 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 144 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 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 71 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. Diastolic BP recovered to 46 mmHg after a recent low of 42 mmHg below 50 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 73 bpm; the latest MAP is 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. SpO2 came back to 50% after reaching 93%; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 38 mmHg with heart rate 99 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. Respiratory rate returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; SpO2 came back to 50% after reaching 93%; the latest bedside set shows MAP 38 mmHg and systolic BP 73 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 came back to 50% after reaching 93%; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the current values include MAP 38 mmHg and heart rate 99 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. Respiratory rate returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; SpO2 came back to 50% after reaching 93%; the most recent entries show MAP 38 mmHg and systolic BP 73 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. Respiratory rate returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the most recent entries show systolic BP 73 mmHg and respiratory rate 8 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 50% after reaching 93%; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the latest bedside set shows MAP 38 mmHg and heart rate 99 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 came back to 50% after reaching 93%; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the last snapshot shows MAP 38 mmHg with heart rate 99 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. Respiratory rate returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the current values include systolic BP 73 mmHg and respiratory rate 8 breaths/min.

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. WBC ended at 25 K/uL after a recent low of 17.6 K/uL; creatinine ended at 2.3 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; the latest bedside set shows heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 38 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. WBC ended at 25 K/uL after a recent low of 17.6 K/uL; creatinine ended at 2.3 mg/dL after dropping as low as 1.8 mg/dL; the most recent entries show heart rate 99 bpm and MAP 38 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. Respiratory rate returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the last snapshot shows systolic BP 73 mmHg with respiratory rate 8 breaths/min.
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 returned to 8 breaths/min after reaching 32 breaths/min; urine output most recently reached 5 mL after low intervals down to 5 mL; the current values include systolic BP 73 mmHg and respiratory rate 8 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. Respiratory rate ended at 32 breaths/min after a recent low of 19 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 88% and 97%, with the latest value 89%; the last snapshot shows MAP 84 mmHg with heart rate 97 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. Creatinine ended at 3.4 mg/dL after dropping as low as 2.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate ended at 32 breaths/min after a recent low of 19 breaths/min; the latest bedside set shows MAP 84 mmHg and systolic BP 102 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 ended at 3.4 mg/dL after dropping as low as 2.9 mg/dL; respiratory rate ended at 32 breaths/min after a recent low of 19 breaths/min; the most recent entries show MAP 84 mmHg and systolic BP 102 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. Respiratory rate ended at 32 breaths/min after a recent low of 19 breaths/min; SpO2 varied between 88% and 97%, with the latest value 89%; the current values include MAP 84 mmHg and heart rate 97 bpm.

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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 127 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest systolic BP is 127 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 21 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 86 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 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. No strong recent threshold breach is recorded in the available variables; the latest MAP is 86 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 75 bpm.

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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 125 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest systolic BP is 125 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 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 90 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 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 90 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 125 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 16 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 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 90 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 125 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest MAP is 85 mmHg; the latest heart rate is 90 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 125 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 16 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 90 bpm; the latest MAP is 85 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest heart rate is 90 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. The recent WBC reading was 14.9 K/uL; the latest systolic BP is 125 mmHg; the latest respiratory rate is 16 breaths/min.

Answer: A


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 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.
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 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.
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 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.
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 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: C