首页> 外文期刊>Respiratory care >Disparity between mainstream and sidestream end-tidal carbon dioxide values and arterial carbon dioxide levels
【24h】

Disparity between mainstream and sidestream end-tidal carbon dioxide values and arterial carbon dioxide levels

机译:主流和侧流潮气末二氧化碳值与动脉二氧化碳水平之间的差异

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Measuring and monitoring end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) is an important aspect of caring for critically ill patients. The 2 methods used for PETCO2 measurement are the mainstream and sidestream methods. OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement between PETCO2 measurements performed by mainstream and sidestream methods with the PaCO2 values. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study. A total of 114 subjects were enrolled in the study. PETCO2 measurements using mainstream and sidestream methods were performed simultaneously with the arterial blood sampling in subjects who were observed in the emergency department and required arterial blood gas analysis. Agreement between the PETCO2 measurements and the PaCO2 values obtained from arterial blood gas analysis were evaluated using the Bland-Altman method. RESULTS: Sixty subjects (52.6%) were female, and the mean age was 60.9 years (95% CI 58.363.6). The mean PaCO2 was 35.16 mm Hg (95% CI 33.81-36.51), the mainstream PETCO2 was 22.11 2 2 (95% CI 21.05-23.18), and the sidestream PETCO2 was 25.48 (95% CI 24.22-26.75). Bland-Altman analysis showed an average difference between mainstream PETCO2 and PaCO2 values of 13 mm Hg 2 2 (95% limits of agreement 0.6 to 25.5) and moderate correlation (r 0.55, P .001). The average difference between the sidestream PETCO2 and PaCO2 values was 9.7 mm Hg (95% limits of agree2 2 ment 5.4 to 24.7) and poor correlation (r 0.41, P .001). CONCLUSIONS: PETCO2 values obtained by mainstream and sidestream methods were found to be significantly lower than the PaCO2 values. There was essentially no agreement between the measurements obtained by 2 different methods and the PaCO2 values.
机译:背景:测量和监测潮气末二氧化碳(PETCO2)是照顾重症患者的重要方面。用于PETCO2测量的2种方法是主流方法和侧流方法。目的:评估通过主流方法和旁流方法进行的PETCO2测量与PaCO2值之间的一致性。方法:这是一项前瞻性观察研究。该研究共招募了114名受试者。在急诊科观察并需要进行动脉血气分析的受试者中,使用主流和旁流方法进行的PETCO2测量与动脉血采样同时进行。使用Bland-Altman方法评估PETCO2测量值与从动脉血气分析获得的PaCO2值之间的一致性。结果:60名受试者(52.6%)为女性,平均年龄为60.9岁(95%CI 58.363.6)。平均PaCO2为35.16毫米汞柱(95%CI 33.81-36.51),主流PETCO2为22.11 2 2(95%CI 21.05-23.18),侧流PETCO2为25.48(95%CI 24.22-26.75)。 Bland-Altman分析显示,主流PETCO2和PaCO2值之间的平均差为13 mm Hg 2 2(95%的一致限度0.6到25.5)和中等相关性(r 0.55,P <.001)。侧流PETCO2和PaCO2值之间的平均差为9.7 mm Hg(协议5.4至24.7的95%限值)且相关性较差(r 0.41,P <.001)。结论:通过主流和侧流方法获得的PETCO2值明显低于PaCO2值。通过2种不同方法获得的测量值与PaCO2值之间基本上没有一致性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号