An athlete has been practicing twice a day in the heat and reports being dizzy.
The patient’s vital signs are blood pressure of 100/2 mm Hg, pulse rate of 100 beats/min, and respiratory rate of 26 breaths/min; the patient does not remember the last voiding time.
The skin is cool to touch and pale in color. Which type of shock is the patient experiencing?

NPO status (nothing by mouth) is not a relevant intervention in this situation. It would be indicated for a patient with gastrointestinal issues or prior to a procedure, but it does not address the potential consequences of rapid fluid administration.

Restricting oral intake would not reverse or mitigate the effects of fluid overload that may have already occurred.

It's important to prioritize assessment of the patient's respiratory status, as fluid overload can lead to pulmonary edema, a serious complication.

Rationale for Choice B:

Elevating the head of the bed to high Fowler's position can be helpful in easing breathing for patients with respiratory distress, but it's not the most immediate priority in this case.

Assessing the patient's respiratory status directly through respiratory rate and lung sounds will provide more comprehensive information about potential fluid overload and guide further interventions.

Rationale for Choice C:

Measuring the client's temperature is not directly relevant to the concern of rapid fluid administration.

While fever could be a sign of infection, which might warrant fluid administration, it's not the primary concern in this scenario.

The priority is to assess for potential fluid overload, which could manifest as respiratory distress. Rationale for Choice D:

Checking the client's respiratory rate and lung sounds is the most appropriate action for the nurse to take in this situation.

Rapid infusion of 900 mL of fluid within a short period could lead to fluid overload, which can manifest as: Increased respiratory rate

Crackles in the lungs Shortness of breath Hypoxia

Early identification of these signs is crucial for prompt intervention and prevention of serious complications.

Choice A rationale:

While explaining the importance and rationale of the new policy may be helpful in some cases, it may not be sufficient for nurses who are resistant to change. This approach assumes that the nurse's resistance is due to a lack of understanding, which may not be the case. It's possible that the nurse understands the rationale but has other concerns or objections.

Focusing solely on explaining the rationale can make the nurse feel they are not being listened to or that their concerns are not being valued. This can further contribute to resistance.

Choice B rationale:

Encouraging the nurse to verbalize their reasons for resistance allows the nurse manager to understand the root cause of the resistance. This could include:

Concerns about the effectiveness of the new policy

Belief that the new policy will create more work or make their job more difficult

Feeling that they were not adequately consulted or involved in the decision-making process Personal factors such as fear of change or a preference for established routines

Once the nurse manager understands the nurse's concerns, they can work together to address them and find ways to facilitate acceptance of the new policy. This approach fosters open communication, collaboration, and shared decision-making, which are essential for successful change management.

Choice C rationale:

Indicating disciplinary consequences may be necessary in some cases, but it should be a last resort. It can create a negative and hostile work environment, further alienate the nurse, and potentially lead to resentment and decreased morale among other staff members.

It's important to prioritize understanding and addressing the underlying reasons for resistance before resorting to disciplinary measures.

Choice D rationale:

Ignoring the resistance and relying on peer pressure is a passive and ineffective approach. It does not address the nurse's concerns and may even exacerbate the situation. This can lead to conflict among staff members, create a divide between those who support the change and those who resist it, and potentially compromise patient care.