Which patient would most likely benefit from a sitz bath?

Choice A rationale:

While providing meticulous oral care and allowing ice chips for dry mouth can promote comfort, it does not address the primary concern of absent bowel sounds.

Ice chips could potentially stimulate bowel activity, but this is not a reliable or recommended method for managing absent bowel sounds in the immediate postoperative period.

It's essential to prioritize actions that assess and address the potential causes of absent bowel sounds, as they can indicate serious complications.

Choice B rationale:

Notifying the surgeon immediately and preparing for emergency surgery is not the appropriate first course of action in this situation.

Emergency surgery would be considered only if there were clear signs of a life-threatening complication, such as bowel perforation or peritonitis.

These complications would typically present with additional symptoms such as severe abdominal pain, fever, and hemodynamic instability.

Absent bowel sounds alone, without other concerning signs, do not warrant immediate surgical intervention.

Choice D rationale:

Allowing the patient to have clear liquids as tolerated is not appropriate when bowel sounds are absent. Introducing oral intake before bowel function has returned can increase the risk of nausea, vomiting, and aspiration.

It's crucial to wait for the return of bowel sounds before initiating oral intake to ensure proper digestion and minimize complications.

Choice C rationale:

Keeping the patient NPO (nothing by mouth) is the most appropriate action when bowel sounds are absent after major abdominal surgery.

This allows the bowel to rest and recover from the surgical manipulation.

It also prevents potential complications such as aspiration and nausea/vomiting that could arise from premature oral intake.

Documenting the absence of bowel sounds in the patient's medical record is essential for communication among healthcare providers and for monitoring the patient's progress.

This documentation provides a clear record of the patient's clinical status and facilitates appropriate decision-making regarding further interventions.

Choice A rationale:

Side effect: A side effect is an effect of a drug that is secondary to the main intended effect. It is usually predictable and may be either beneficial or harmful. However, constipation is not a common or expected side effect of iron supplements. It is more likely to be an adverse reaction.

Choice B rationale:

Therapeutic effect: The therapeutic effect is the intended effect of a drug, the one that is desired to treat the condition. In this case, the therapeutic effect of the iron supplement would be to increase the patient's iron levels. Constipation is not the desired effect of the iron supplement, so it is not a therapeutic effect.

Choice C rationale:

Adverse reaction: An adverse reaction is an unwanted or harmful reaction to a drug that is not necessarily predictable. It can range from mild to severe. Constipation is a common adverse reaction to iron supplements. It is thought to be caused by the iron binding to undigested food in the intestines, making it harder to pass stool.

Choice D rationale:

Toxicity: Toxicity refers to a poisonous or harmful effect of a drug. It is usually caused by taking too much of a drug or by a drug interacting with another drug or substance. Constipation is not a sign of iron toxicity. Iron toxicity can cause symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea.