Suppr超能文献

从病人监护仪中观察到的动脉血压的验证;院前研究的工具。

Validation of arterial blood pressures observed from the patient monitor; a tool for prehospital research.

机构信息

Department of Critical Care Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

出版信息

J Clin Monit Comput. 2010 Apr;24(2):93-100. doi: 10.1007/s10877-009-9215-7. Epub 2009 Dec 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

For some time, the inaccuracies of non-invasive blood pressure measurement in critically ill patients have been recognised. Measurement difficulties can occur even in optimal conditions, but in prehospital transportation vehicles, problems are exacerbated. Intra-arterial pressures must be used as the reference against which to compare the performance of non-invasive methods in the critically ill patient population. Intra-arterial manometer data observed from the patient monitor has frequently been used as the reference against which to assess the accuracy of noninvasive devices in the emergency setting. To test this method's validity, this study aimed to determine whether numerical monitor pressures can be considered interchangeable with independently sampled intra-arterial pressures.

METHODS

Intensive Care Unit nurses were asked to document arterial systolic, diastolic and mean pressures numerically displayed on the patient monitor. Observed pressures were compared to reference intra-arterial pressures independently recorded to a computer following analogue to digital conversion. Differences between observed and recorded pressures were evaluated using the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) protocol. Additionally, two-level linear mixed effects analyses and Bland-Altman comparisons were undertaken.

RESULTS

Systolic, diastolic and integrated mean pressures observed during 60 data collection sessions (n = 600) fulfilled AAMI protocol criteria. Integrated mean pressures were the most robust. For these pressures, mean error (reference minus observed) was 0.5 mm Hg (SD 1.4 mm Hg); 95% CI (two-level linear mixed effects analysis) 0.4-0.6 mm Hg; P < 0.001. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated tight 95% limits of agreement (-2.3 to 3.2 mm Hg), and uniform agreement across the range of mean blood pressures.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated mean arterial pressures observed from a well maintained patient monitor can be considered interchangeable with independently sampled intra-arterial pressures and may be confidently used as the reference against which to test the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measuring methods in the prehospital or emergency setting.

摘要

目的

一段时间以来,人们已经认识到非侵入性血压测量在危重病患者中的不准确性。即使在最佳条件下,也会出现测量困难,但在院前运输车辆中,问题会更加严重。必须使用动脉内压作为参考,以比较在危重病患者人群中使用非侵入性方法的性能。从患者监护仪观察到的动脉内压数据经常被用作评估紧急情况下非侵入性设备准确性的参考。为了测试这种方法的有效性,本研究旨在确定数值监护仪压力是否可以被认为与独立采样的动脉内压互换。

方法

要求重症监护病房护士记录患者监护仪上显示的动脉收缩压、舒张压和平均压的数值。观察到的压力与独立记录到计算机的参考动脉内压进行比较,采用模拟到数字转换。使用医疗器械促进协会 (AAMI) 协议评估观察到的压力与记录到的压力之间的差异。此外,还进行了两级线性混合效应分析和 Bland-Altman 比较。

结果

在 60 次数据采集过程中(n = 600),观察到的收缩压、舒张压和综合平均压符合 AAMI 协议标准。综合平均压最稳健。对于这些压力,平均误差(参考值减去观察值)为 0.5 毫米汞柱(SD 1.4 毫米汞柱);95%CI(两级线性混合效应分析)为 0.4-0.6 毫米汞柱;P < 0.001。Bland-Altman 图显示了紧密的 95%一致性界限(-2.3 至 3.2 毫米汞柱),并且在平均血压范围内一致。

结论

从维护良好的患者监护仪观察到的综合平均动脉压可以被认为与独立采样的动脉内压互换,可以自信地用作参考,以测试非侵入性血压测量方法在院前或紧急情况下的准确性。

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