{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022321428571428572, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027901785714285715, 'mean_word_length': 5.4496402877697845, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessing Acid-Base Status: Physiologic Versus Physicochemical Approach.

The physiologic approach has long been used in assessing acid-base status. This approach considers acids as hydrogen ion donors and bases as hydrogen ion acceptors and the acid-base status of the organism as reflecting the interaction of net hydrogen ion balance with body buffers. In the physiologic approach, the carbonic acid/bicarbonate buffer pair is used for assessing acid-base status and blood pH is determined by carbonic acid (ie, Paco2) and serum bicarbonate levels. More recently, the physicochemical approach was introduced, which has gained popularity, particularly among intensivists and anesthesiologists. This approach posits that the acid-base status of body fluids is determined by changes in the dissociation of water that are driven by the interplay of 3 independent variables: the sum of strong (fully dissociated) cation concentrations minus the sum of strong anion concentrations (strong ion difference); the total concentration of weak acids; and Paco2. These 3 independent variables mechanistically determine both hydrogen ion concentration and bicarbonate concentration of body fluids, which are considered as dependent variables. Our experience indicates that the average practitioner is familiar with only one of these approaches and knows very little, if any, about the other approach. In the present Acid-Base and Electrolyte Teaching Case, we attempt to bridge this knowledge gap by contrasting the physiologic and physicochemical approaches to assessing acid-base status. We first outline the essential features, advantages, and limitations of each of the 2 approaches and then apply each approach to the same patient presentation. We conclude with our view about the optimal approach.