Suppr超能文献

动脉压测量中的偏差。

Biases in the measurement of arterial pressure.

作者信息

Finnie K J, Watts D G, Armstrong P W

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 1984 Nov;12(11):965-8. doi: 10.1097/00003246-198411000-00009.

Abstract

We compared cuff to simultaneous direct intra-arterial pressure in 26 seriously ill patients, in order to: test the accuracy of oscillometric and auscultatory estimates of direct systolic pressure; test muffling and disappearance of sound as indices of direct diastolic pressure; gain insight into the timing of the different phases of Korotkoff sounds; and assess the local and general effects of cuff inflation on blood pressure. We found that conventional estimation of systolic blood pressure by auscultation of the first Korotkoff sound (K1) underestimates direct systolic pressure by an average of 16 to 17 mm Hg. Oscillometric pressure measurement provides a significantly better estimate than K1 but still underestimates by 7 to 8 mm Hg. These systolic cuff measurements are biased downward from direct values because of local cuff effect and cuff error. Diastolic cuff measurements deviate from direct values primarily because of a local cuff effect which produces an upward bias of 5 mm Hg at the point of sound muffling (K4), and 3 mm Hg at the point where sounds disappear (K5). We recommend oscillometric measurement of systolic pressure and K5 measurement of diastolic pressure as the best indirect estimates of blood pressure in critically ill patients.

摘要

我们比较了26例重症患者袖带血压与同时测量的直接动脉内血压,目的是:测试示波法和听诊法对直接收缩压估计的准确性;测试声音的减弱和消失作为直接舒张压指标的情况;深入了解柯氏音不同阶段的时间;评估袖带充气对血压的局部和总体影响。我们发现,通过听诊第一声柯氏音(K1)常规估计收缩压时,平均低估直接收缩压16至17毫米汞柱。示波法测量血压比K1法能提供明显更好的估计值,但仍低估7至8毫米汞柱。由于局部袖带效应和袖带误差,这些袖带收缩压测量值相对于直接测量值存在向下偏差。袖带舒张压测量值偏离直接测量值主要是因为局部袖带效应,在声音减弱点(K4)产生5毫米汞柱的向上偏差,在声音消失点(K5)产生3毫米汞柱的向上偏差。我们建议,对于重症患者,示波法测量收缩压和K5法测量舒张压是最佳的间接血压估计方法。

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