Background: Shock is a life-threatening condition requiring prompt fluid resuscitation to restore perfusion. Various fluid resuscitation methods—such as crystalloids, colloids, and goal-directed therapy—are used, but their comparative effectiveness remains debated.
Aim: To compare different fluid resuscitation methods in patients with shock and evaluate their clinical outcomes.
Materials and Methods: A prospective observational/comparative study was conducted in ICU and Emergency Department over 12 months. Patients diagnosed with shock were divided into groups based on the method of fluid resuscitation. Hemodynamic parameters, urine output, lactate clearance, and mortality were compared.
Results: Goal-directed fluid resuscitation showed better outcomes in terms of lactate clearance, reduced ICU stay, and lower mortality.
Conclusion: Goal-directed resuscitation offers superior clinical outcomes compared to conventional crystalloid or colloid-only resuscitation.