探访医院重症监护病房：超常规满负荷飞速运转******
(新春走基层)探访医院重症监护病房：超常规满负荷飞速运转
中新网太原1月11日电 题：探访医院重症监护病房：超常规满负荷飞速运转
中新网记者 范丽芳
“你赶快派人把重症的床推回来，这边有重症患者等着用呢，特殊时期，咱们不能走常规交接。”山西白求恩医院重症医学科(ICU)护士长武文静语气焦急，挂了电话后，又叮嘱专人尽快和科室完成病床交接，“现在的工作数以秒计，说话有点急，大家也都理解。”
近日，记者探访山西白求恩医院ICU病房。伴随着医疗设备发出的此起彼伏的“滴滴滴滴”，多数患者在呼吸机的辅助下呼吸，病房里偶有剧烈而艰难的咳嗽声响起；医护人员或步履匆忙穿梭在病区，备药、整理器械，或守在患者床旁，检查生命体征、调整呼吸机参数、调整补液速度，为患者翻身、排痰……
作为省内最早开放、全面收治新冠病毒感染患者的医院之一，山西白求恩医院提供的数据显示，2022年12月7日以来，该院急诊及发热门诊接诊近9000人次，全院入院人数累计近6000人次。当前，医院正面临日均400至500名急诊感染患者就诊，其中不少属于重症。
“我们已经把ICU床位从30张扩至54张，除了医疗设备，医院还增派6名医生、60名护士来支援。”该院ICU主任武卫东介绍，该科室患者平均年龄在80岁以上且合并症较多，平均住院日较长。
医护人员正在救治重症患者。 韦亮 摄也因为此，ICU护士长武文静看到在转运床上等待病床的患者，不由得焦急万分、语速加快，“冒着得罪人的风险”也得将病床尽快“催”回来，“为争分夺秒救治患者，我们每个人、每个环节必须超常规满负荷飞速运转。”
记者离开ICU病房时，保洁人员已将被送回的病床进行清洁消杀，六七个护士齐心协力，将患者平托至病床，更换病号服、监测生命体征、填写患者信息……又是一番忙碌。
作为迎战重症高峰的第一道关口，急诊科更早感受到扑面而来的接诊压力。
山西白求恩医院急诊内科副主任刘宏轩介绍，起初接诊的患者多是发烧、咳嗽、气喘等症状，“这几天，从各市、县等基层转来的重症患者明显增多”。
为缓解急诊科压力，医院将急诊内科和急诊外科床位合并，扩增固定床位；将发热门诊留观床位和感染病科床位作为急诊机动床位；在急诊原有基础上，全院随时调拨支援；医务部、护理部成立专班驻扎急诊，24小时排班值班。
疫情“大考”仍在继续。武卫东、武文静、刘宏轩等临床一线的医护人员开始思考，未来，如何加强人才储备、制定诸如患者猛增等突发状况的应急预案、优化对重症患者个性化和精细化管理、强化各科室院感培训等。(完)
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
