Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?

The present study was performed to test a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo using head-up–head-down tilting in post-cardiac surgery patients. Impressive improvements in Bland and Altman limits of agreement from 37.5% to 21.6% were recorded. The results, however could be attributed to a fai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Critchley, Lester AH
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Commentary
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2689455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19344487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc7718
_version_ 1782167794955059200
author Critchley, Lester AH
author_facet Critchley, Lester AH
author_sort Critchley, Lester AH
collection PubMed
description The present study was performed to test a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo using head-up–head-down tilting in post-cardiac surgery patients. Impressive improvements in Bland and Altman limits of agreement from 37.5% to 21.6% were recorded. The results, however could be attributed to a failure to produce a wide enough range of test circulatory conditions. A more rigorous test of performance is needed before any real conclusion concerning use of the FloTrac/Vigileo in clinical practice can be made.
format Text
id pubmed-2689455
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26894552010-03-04 Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability? Critchley, Lester AH Crit Care Commentary The present study was performed to test a new software version of the FloTrac/Vigileo using head-up–head-down tilting in post-cardiac surgery patients. Impressive improvements in Bland and Altman limits of agreement from 37.5% to 21.6% were recorded. The results, however could be attributed to a failure to produce a wide enough range of test circulatory conditions. A more rigorous test of performance is needed before any real conclusion concerning use of the FloTrac/Vigileo in clinical practice can be made. BioMed Central 2009 2009-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC2689455/ /pubmed/19344487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc7718 Text en Copyright © 2009 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Critchley, Lester AH
Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title_full Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title_fullStr Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title_full_unstemmed Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title_short Self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
title_sort self-calibrating pulse contour cardiac output: do validation studies really show its clinical reliability?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2689455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19344487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc7718
work_keys_str_mv AT critchleylesterah selfcalibratingpulsecontourcardiacoutputdovalidationstudiesreallyshowitsclinicalreliability

Ejemplares similares