Westenskow D R, Meline L, Pace N L
J Clin Monit. 1987 Apr;3(2):80-6. doi: 10.1007/BF00858354.
Computer systems developed for the automatic control of blood pressure have been previously shown to induce hypotension with sodium nitroprusside more rapidly and accurately than can be done with manual control. We compared the performance of a computer controller with performances by 10 anesthesiologists during challenges to homeostasis similar (or analogous) to those occurring during a surgical procedure. Hypotension was induced in 10 mongrel dogs and maintained for 2 hours, either by an anesthesiologist or by the computer controller. Challenges to homeostasis were given during the 2-hour period. The computer brought the mean arterial pressure to the desired value in an average of 4.1 minutes compared with 6.3 minutes for the anesthesiologists, but this difference was not statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference between the computer and the anesthesiologists for 25 performance criteria. The anesthesiologists performed better during two imposed hypertensive perturbations by turning off the sodium nitroprusside sooner when the pressure rapidly decreased. In general, the computer controller performed as well as experienced anesthesiologists who devoted full attention to the control of blood pressure.
先前已表明，为自动控制血压而开发的计算机系统，与手动控制相比，使用硝普钠诱导低血压的速度更快、更准确。我们将计算机控制器的性能与10位麻醉医生在类似于手术过程中出现的内环境稳态挑战期间的性能进行了比较。在10只杂种犬中诱导低血压，并由麻醉医生或计算机控制器维持2小时。在这2小时期间进行内环境稳态挑战。计算机将平均动脉压平均在4.1分钟内降至所需值，而麻醉医生则需要6.3分钟，但这种差异无统计学意义。在25项性能标准方面，计算机与麻醉医生之间没有统计学上的显著差异。在两次人为施加的高血压扰动期间，当血压迅速下降时，麻醉医生通过更快地关闭硝普钠表现得更好。总体而言，计算机控制器的表现与全神贯注于血压控制的经验丰富的麻醉医生相当。
