UNLABELLED: Our aim was to provide a meta-analysis of the literature concerning the validation of thoracic impedance cardiography (TIC) and to explain variations in reported results from differences in the studies. One hundred fifty-four studies (164 Fisher's Z-transformed correlation coefficients) comparing measurements of cardiac output or related parameters from TIC and a reference method were analyzed. Papers were classified according to differences in TIC methodology, reference method, and subject characteristics. Pooling using the random-effects method yielded an overall correlation of r = 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.84). ANOVA revealed a significant influence of the reference method and the subject characteristics on the correlation coefficient. In cardiac patients, the correlation was significantly decreased. No influence of the applied TIC methodology was found. CONCLUSION: TIC might be useful for trend analysis of different groups of patients. However, since the reference method was of significant influence, differences between TIC and the reference method are incorrectly attributed to TIC alone.
UNLABELLED: Our aim was to provide a meta-analysis of the literature concerning the validation of thoracic impedance cardiography (TIC) and to explain variations in reported results from differences in the studies. One hundred fifty-four studies (164 Fisher's Z-transformed correlation coefficients) comparing measurements of cardiac output or related parameters from TIC and a reference method were analyzed. Papers were classified according to differences in TIC methodology, reference method, and subject characteristics. Pooling using the random-effects method yielded an overall correlation of r = 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.84). ANOVA revealed a significant influence of the reference method and the subject characteristics on the correlation coefficient. In cardiac patients, the correlation was significantly decreased. No influence of the applied TIC methodology was found. CONCLUSION: TIC might be useful for trend analysis of different groups of patients. However, since the reference method was of significant influence, differences between TIC and the reference method are incorrectly attributed to TIC alone.
Authors: Eva M Staal; Jan Baan; J Wouter Jukema; Ernst E van der Wall; Paul Steendijk Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-05-04 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Alexander Jones; Alessandro Beda; Clive Osmond; Keith M Godfrey; David M Simpson; David I W Phillips Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-07-22 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Jordan P R McIntyre; Kevin M Ellyett; Edwin A Mitchell; Gina M Quill; John Md Thompson; Alistair W Stewart; Robert N Doughty; Peter R Stone Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2015-03-28 Impact factor: 3.007