Which IV fluid is the most appropriate for treating acute Diabetes insipidus (DI)?

Choice A reason:
Administering furosemide in this scenario would further lower the serum potassium level, as furosemide is a loop diuretic known for causing potassium loss through urine. This action could worsen the patient’s hypokalemia, leading to severe complications such as cardiac arrhythmias. Therefore, administering furosemide in the presence of hypokalemia is inappropriate and could put the patient at significant risk.
Choice B reason:
Administering both spironolactone and furosemide together without addressing the hypokalemia would not be safe. While spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic, combining it with furosemide could negate its potassium-sparing effects. Furthermore, administering furosemide when hypokalemia is present could cause further electrolyte imbalance. Proper evaluation of the patient's condition and selective administration of the medications are crucial in this case.
Choice C reason:
Withholding both medications and attributing the decision to contraindications with hyperkalemia is incorrect because the reported potassium level (3.2 mEq/L) reflects hypokalemia, not hyperkalemia. Misinterpreting the lab result could delay appropriate treatment, such as correcting the potassium level or safely administering a medication that would not exacerbate the hypokalemia. Proper communication with the healthcare provider is necessary for effective patient care.
Choice D reason:
Administering spironolactone is the best action in this scenario because it is a potassium-sparing diuretic. By administering spironolactone, the risk of worsening hypokalemia is minimized. Notifying the healthcare provider about the low potassium level ensures appropriate monitoring and any necessary interventions, such as potassium supplementation. This approach is both safe and effective in managing the patient’s current condition while adhering to standard nursing practices.

Choice A reason: This statement is incorrect because the combination of heparin and warfarin does not dissolve the blood clot faster. Instead, these medications have different mechanisms of action. Heparin works quickly to prevent further clot formation, while warfarin takes several days to reach therapeutic levels and maintain anticoagulation over the long term.
Choice B reason: While the risk of a blood clot in the lungs (pulmonary embolism) is a concern, the necessity of using both heparin and warfarin is not because of the need for multiple blood thinners but rather due to their complementary pharmacokinetics. Heparin provides immediate anticoagulation, whereas warfarin requires time to become effective.
Choice C reason: This statement is also incorrect. Heparin does not dissolve clots but works to prevent the extension of existing clots and the formation of new ones. Warfarin, likewise, does not dissolve clots but prevents further clot formation by inhibiting vitamin K-dependent clotting factors.
Choice D reason: This is the accurate response. Heparin works immediately, providing rapid anticoagulation, which is essential for acute management of venous thromboembolism. On the other hand, warfarin takes several days to achieve its anticoagulant effect because it works by inhibiting the synthesis of vitamin K-dependent clotting factors. Therefore, the patient is initially placed on heparin to provide immediate protection against clotting while warfarin is started simultaneously. Once warfarin reaches a therapeutic level, heparin can be discontinued, and warfarin can maintain long-term anticoagulation.