A nurse is caring for a client who has an arterial line inserted in the radial artery. Which of the following actions should the nurse take?

Choice A reason: A parent with type 2 diabetes indicates a genetic risk for metabolic issues, possibly relevant to liver disease progression, like NAFLD. However, it’s historical data, not an immediate threat to transplant success. The priority lies with factors affecting post-operative care, like adherence, over family history. This statement, while useful, isn’t urgent for reporting now.

Choice B reason: Childhood asthma history suggests past respiratory issues, potentially complicating anesthesia or recovery, but if resolved, it’s low priority. End-stage liver disease focuses on hepatic function, not dormant lung conditions. Without current symptoms, this doesn’t impact transplant candidacy urgently, making it less critical than adherence concerns.

Choice C reason: Poor medication adherence is a red flag for transplant listing, as post-operative immunosuppressants prevent rejection, requiring strict compliance. Non-adherence risks graft failure, a life-threatening outcome in end-stage liver disease. This statement demands immediate provider attention to assess candidacy and plan interventions, prioritizing it over other concerns here.

Choice D reason: Lack of family support affects emotional coping and post-transplant care logistics, potentially stressing recovery, but it’s not an immediate medical risk. Adherence to medications directly impacts survival, outweighing psychosocial factors in urgency. This statement, while relevant, doesn’t necessitate urgent reporting compared to compliance issues.

Choice A reason: Blood pressure of 100/70 mm Hg may suggest fluid overload, a component of pulmonary edema, but it’s not a specific indicator for furosemide use. This finding reflects systemic effects rather than direct lung involvement. Furosemide targets fluid in the alveoli, not just blood pressure changes. Without lung-specific signs like crackles, this alone doesn’t confirm the need for the diuretic, as hypotension could also indicate other issues unrelated to pulmonary edema’s primary pathology.

Choice B reason: Vesicular breath sounds are soft, normal sounds heard over healthy lung fields, indicating no fluid accumulation. Pulmonary edema, however, presents with abnormal sounds like crackles due to fluid in alveoli. Furosemide is prescribed to clear this fluid, so normal vesicular sounds suggest the lungs are clear, not requiring diuretic intervention. This finding contradicts the condition furosemide treats, making it an inappropriate indicator for the prescription in this context.

Choice C reason: Bilateral coarse crackles are hallmark signs of pulmonary edema, caused by fluid leaking into alveoli from increased left heart pressure. Furosemide, a loop diuretic, reduces this fluid by enhancing renal excretion, relieving lung congestion. This finding directly correlates with the drug’s purpose—removing excess fluid to improve oxygenation and reduce respiratory distress. Thus, crackles confirm the prescription’s appropriateness, targeting the core pathophysiology of pulmonary edema effectively.

Choice D reason: Potassium at 3.2 mEq/L is below normal (3.5-5.0 mEq/L), often a side effect of furosemide due to increased urinary potassium loss. However, this isn’t an indication for starting the drug; it’s a consequence to monitor post-administration. Pulmonary edema’s treatment focuses on fluid removal, not electrolyte levels initially. Low potassium might require correction, but it doesn’t justify the prescription, making this finding unrelated to furosemide’s therapeutic intent.