Cargando…

A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review examines the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs and explores its use to trigger clinical interventions in the management of obstetric haemorrhage. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was carried out using a comprehensive search strategy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho, Souza, João Paulo, Durocher, Jill, Perel, Pablo, Blum, Jennifer, Winikoff, Beverly, Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23483915
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057594
_version_ 1782261828081942528
author Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho
Souza, João Paulo
Durocher, Jill
Perel, Pablo
Blum, Jennifer
Winikoff, Beverly
Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin
author_facet Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho
Souza, João Paulo
Durocher, Jill
Perel, Pablo
Blum, Jennifer
Winikoff, Beverly
Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin
author_sort Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This systematic review examines the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs and explores its use to trigger clinical interventions in the management of obstetric haemorrhage. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was carried out using a comprehensive search strategy to identify studies presenting data on the relationship of clinical signs & symptoms and blood loss. Methodological quality was assessed using the STROBE checklist and the general guidelines of MOOSE. RESULTS: 30 studies were included and five were performed in women with pregnancy-related haemorrhage (other studies were carried in non-obstetric populations). Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and shock index were the parameters most frequently studied. An association between blood loss and HR changes was observed in 22 out of 24 studies, and between blood loss and SBP was observed in 17 out of 23 studies. An association was found in all papers reporting on the relationship of shock index and blood loss. Seven studies have used Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves to determine the accuracy of clinical signs in predicting blood loss. In those studies the AUC ranged from 0.56 to 0.74 for HR, from 0.56 to 0.79 for SBP and from 0.77 to 0.84 for shock index. In some studies, HR, SBP and shock index were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSION: We found a substantial variability in the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs, making it difficult to establish specific cut-off points for clinical signs that could be used as triggers for clinical interventions. However, the shock index can be an accurate indicator of compensatory changes in the cardiovascular system due to blood loss. Considering that most of the evidence included in this systematic review is derived from studies in non-obstetric populations, further research on the use of the shock index in obstetric populations is needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3590203
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35902032013-03-12 A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho Souza, João Paulo Durocher, Jill Perel, Pablo Blum, Jennifer Winikoff, Beverly Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: This systematic review examines the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs and explores its use to trigger clinical interventions in the management of obstetric haemorrhage. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was carried out using a comprehensive search strategy to identify studies presenting data on the relationship of clinical signs & symptoms and blood loss. Methodological quality was assessed using the STROBE checklist and the general guidelines of MOOSE. RESULTS: 30 studies were included and five were performed in women with pregnancy-related haemorrhage (other studies were carried in non-obstetric populations). Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and shock index were the parameters most frequently studied. An association between blood loss and HR changes was observed in 22 out of 24 studies, and between blood loss and SBP was observed in 17 out of 23 studies. An association was found in all papers reporting on the relationship of shock index and blood loss. Seven studies have used Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves to determine the accuracy of clinical signs in predicting blood loss. In those studies the AUC ranged from 0.56 to 0.74 for HR, from 0.56 to 0.79 for SBP and from 0.77 to 0.84 for shock index. In some studies, HR, SBP and shock index were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSION: We found a substantial variability in the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs, making it difficult to establish specific cut-off points for clinical signs that could be used as triggers for clinical interventions. However, the shock index can be an accurate indicator of compensatory changes in the cardiovascular system due to blood loss. Considering that most of the evidence included in this systematic review is derived from studies in non-obstetric populations, further research on the use of the shock index in obstetric populations is needed. Public Library of Science 2013-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3590203/ /pubmed/23483915 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057594 Text en © 2013 Pacagnella et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pacagnella, Rodolfo Carvalho
Souza, João Paulo
Durocher, Jill
Perel, Pablo
Blum, Jennifer
Winikoff, Beverly
Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin
A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title_full A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title_fullStr A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title_short A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Blood Loss and Clinical Signs
title_sort systematic review of the relationship between blood loss and clinical signs
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3590203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23483915
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057594
work_keys_str_mv AT pacagnellarodolfocarvalho asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT souzajoaopaulo asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT durocherjill asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT perelpablo asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT blumjennifer asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT winikoffbeverly asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT gulmezogluahmetmetin asystematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT pacagnellarodolfocarvalho systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT souzajoaopaulo systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT durocherjill systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT perelpablo systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT blumjennifer systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT winikoffbeverly systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns
AT gulmezogluahmetmetin systematicreviewoftherelationshipbetweenbloodlossandclinicalsigns