Guechi Youcef, Pichot Amélie, Frasca Denis, Rayeh-Pelardy Fatima, Lardeur Jean-Yves, Mimoz Olivier
Emergency Department, University Hospital of Poitiers, 2 rue de la Milétrie, 86000, Poitiers, France.
Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of Poitiers, 6 rue de la Milétrie, 86000, Poitiers, France.
J Clin Monit Comput. 2015 Dec;29(6):721-6. doi: 10.1007/s10877-015-9658-y. Epub 2015 Jan 23.
To compare respiration rate measurement by an acoustic method and thoracic impedance to capnometry as the reference method, in patients at the Emergency Department after drug or alcoholic poisoning. In this observational study, 30 patients aged 18 or older, hospitalized at the Emergency Department for drug or alcoholic poisoning, without any contraindication to a face mask and/or a cervical acoustic sensor, were included in the study. They benefited from a simultaneous recording of their respiration rate by the acoustic method (RRa(®), Masimo Corp., Irvine, CA, USA), by thoracic impedance (Philips Intellivue(®) MP2, Suresnes, France) and by capnometry (Capnostream(®) 20, Oridion, Jerusalem, Israël) through a face mask (Capnomask(®), Mediplus Ltd, Raleigh, NC, USA) for 40-60 min. Of the 86,578 triplets collected, 77,155 (89.1%) were exploitable. Median (range) respiration rate measured by capnometry was 18 (7-29) bpm. Compared to capnometry, bias and limits of agreement were 0.1 ± 3.8 bpm for the acoustic method and 0.3 ± 5.5 bpm for thoracic impedance. The proportions of RR values collected by acoustic method or by thoracic impedance which differed over 10 or 20% during more than 15 s, compared to capnometry, were 8.3 versus 14.3, and 1.5 versus 3.8%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The acoustic sensor had to be repositioned on three patients. For 11 patients, the Capnomask(®) was removed several times. In patients with drug or alcoholic poisoning, the acoustic method seems more accurate than thoracic impedance and better tolerated than face mask capnometry.
为比较声学方法和胸阻抗法测量呼吸频率与作为参考方法的二氧化碳描记法，对急诊科药物或酒精中毒患者进行研究。在这项观察性研究中，纳入了30名年龄18岁及以上、因药物或酒精中毒在急诊科住院、对面罩和/或颈部声学传感器无任何禁忌证的患者。他们通过面罩（Capnomask®，Mediplus Ltd，美国北卡罗来纳州罗利市）同时采用声学方法（RRa®，Masimo Corp.，美国加利福尼亚州尔湾市）、胸阻抗法（飞利浦Intellivue® MP2，法国叙雷讷）和二氧化碳描记法（Capnostream® 20，Oridion，以色列耶路撒冷）记录呼吸频率40 - 60分钟。在收集的86,578组三联数据中，77,155组（89.1%）可用于分析。通过二氧化碳描记法测量的呼吸频率中位数（范围）为18（7 - 29）次/分钟。与二氧化碳描记法相比，声学方法的偏差和一致性界限为0.1 ± 3.8次/分钟，胸阻抗法为0.3 ± 5.5次/分钟。与二氧化碳描记法相比，声学方法或胸阻抗法收集的呼吸频率（RR）值在超过15秒的时间内相差超过10%或20%的比例分别为8.3%对14.3%和1.5%对3.8%（p < 0.0001）。有3名患者的声学传感器需要重新放置。有11名患者的Capnomask®被多次取下。在药物或酒精中毒患者中，声学方法似乎比胸阻抗法更准确，且比面罩二氧化碳描记法耐受性更好。
