Suppr超能文献

[失血的量化。视觉估计有多精确,其准确性取决于什么?]

[Quantification of blood loss. How precise is visual estimation and what does its accuracy depend on?].

作者信息

Meiser A, Casagranda O, Skipka G, Laubenthal H

机构信息

Klinik für Anaesthesiologie am St. Josef-Hospital, Klinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum.

出版信息

Anaesthesist. 2001 Jan;50(1):13-20. doi: 10.1007/s001010050957.

Abstract

Estimation of blood loss is a difficult task. Apart from measuring the volume of the suctioned blood the anaesthetist has to make a visual estimate of blood shed on the floor, spread in the surgeons' gowns and gloves and hidden in drapes and sponges at nearly every operation. We were interested in how exact visual estimation of blood loss can be and what factors influence accuracy and precision of the visual estimate. In one OR we simulated typical blood loss scenes occurring during a mock hip joint replacement, using our normal customary equipment of drapes, sponges and containers. More than 8 litres of blood from autologous whole blood donations were partitioned with a graduated measure and syringes and were distributed around the OR in 22 locations in typical ways. 36 members of staff entered the OR one by one and all gave their 22 estimates. Results were analysed by repeated measures analysis of variance. Bias (accuracy) and variation error (precision) were calculated for individuals and groups of individuals. We found a broad deviation of the visual estimates and little coincidence with the actual values. Over- and underestimations by 2 or even 3 were rather common; underestimations were more frequent. We found a significant trend to overestimate diluted blood, even though these certain sites were known to exhibit diluted blood. On the other hand laparotomy pads and sponges fully saturated with blood as well as the simulation of the operative site were grossly underestimated. Age, sex and professional experience (!) did not influence the magnitude of estimation errors, but the professional groups'estimates differed: anaesthetists estimated slightly but significantly more than orthopedic or general surgeons. Obviously our capability to estimate lost blood volumes is more influenced by our belonging to a professional group than by our professional experience. Do we not learn by experience? Diluted blood is overestimated, whereas in some other typical scenes blood loss is grossly underestimated. Simulations such as this one may improve our estimation capabilities and thus result in better patient care in the OR.

摘要

估计失血量是一项艰巨的任务。除了测量吸引出的血液量外,麻醉师几乎在每次手术时都要对地板上、外科医生手术衣和手套上溅出的、藏在手术单和海绵中的血液进行目测估计。我们感兴趣的是失血量的目测估计能有多准确,以及哪些因素会影响目测估计的准确性和精确性。在一间手术室里,我们使用了手术单、海绵和容器等常规设备,模拟了髋关节置换手术中典型的失血场景。从自体全血捐献中抽取了8升多的血液,用刻度量具和注射器进行分割,并以典型的方式分布在手术室的22个位置。36名工作人员逐一进入手术室,并给出他们对22处的估计值。结果通过重复测量方差分析进行分析。计算了个体和个体组的偏差(准确性)和变异误差(精确性)。我们发现目测估计值偏差很大,与实际值几乎没有吻合度。高估或低估2倍甚至3倍的情况相当常见;低估更为频繁。我们发现,即使知道某些部位会出现稀释血液,对于稀释血液仍有显著的高估趋势。另一方面,完全被血液浸透的剖腹手术垫和海绵以及手术部位的模拟情况则被严重低估。年龄、性别和专业经验(!)并未影响估计误差的大小,但不同专业组的估计存在差异:麻醉师的估计略高于骨科或普通外科医生,但差异显著。显然,我们估计失血量的能力更多地受到我们所属专业组的影响,而非专业经验。难道我们没有从经验中学习吗?稀释血液被高估,而在其他一些典型场景中,失血量则被严重低估。这样的模拟可能会提高我们的估计能力,从而在手术室中为患者提供更好的护理。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验