Literature DB >> 17116557

Estimated height, weight, and body mass index: implications for research and patient safety.

Kimberly M Hendershot1, Linda Robinson, Jason Roland, Khashayar Vaziri, Anne G Rizzo, Samir M Fakhry.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that weight influences patient care and outcomes. Health-care providers (HCPs) sometimes rely on patient self-reports or HCP estimates of height and weight. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of self-reported height and weight and HCP estimations of height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) classification when compared with measured height, weight, and calculated BMI. STUDY
DESIGN: Attending physicians, residents, and nurses provided height and weight estimates along with BMI categorizations for 110 trauma patients at a large, teaching hospital with a Level I trauma center. Patients provided reports of their heights and weights. Measured heights and weights were obtained with appropriate calibrated devices, and BMIs were calculated. Estimates and categorizations were then compared with measured and calculated values.
RESULTS: HCPs were 41% and 53% accurate in estimating height and weight, respectively. Self-reports had higher accuracy (69% and 92%, respectively) but still resulted in a BMI misclassification of 32%. Twenty-two percent of patient self-reports were unobtainable. When HCPs attempted to categorize a patient into a BMI group, the accuracy was 56%. Functioning, calibrated instruments for measuring height and weight were frequently unavailable in relevant hospital locations.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that HCPs' estimates of height, weight, and BMI category are highly inaccurate. Patient self-reports are better, but are unavailable at times. Objective measurements with calibrated instruments are necessary for accuracy in research studies and for patient safety in clinical practice. Efforts to ensure the availability of calibrated instruments may be necessary in the hospital setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17116557     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.08.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  6 in total

Review 1.  Fluid resuscitation in sepsis: the great 30 mL per kg hoax.

Authors:  Paul E Marik; Liam Byrne; Frank van Haren
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Low Tidal Volume Ventilation in Patients without Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Paradigm Shift in Mechanical Ventilation.

Authors:  Jed Lipes; Azadeh Bojmehrani; Francois Lellouche
Journal:  Crit Care Res Pract       Date:  2012-03-27

3.  Visual perceptions of male obesity: a cross-cultural study examining male and female lay perceptions of obesity in Caucasian males.

Authors:  Eric Robinson; Pleunie S Hogenkamp
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  Development and validation of the Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT).

Authors:  K L Protopapa; J C Simpson; N C E Smith; S R Moonesinghe
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Accuracy of height estimation and tidal volume setting using anthropometric formulas in an ICU Caucasian population.

Authors:  Erwan L'her; Jérôme Martin-Babau; François Lellouche
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 6.925

6.  Associations of obesity with tracheal intubation success on first attempt and adverse events in the emergency department: An analysis of the multicenter prospective observational study in Japan.

Authors:  Hiromasa Yakushiji; Tadahiro Goto; Wataru Shirasaka; Yusuke Hagiwara; Hiroko Watase; Hiroshi Okamoto; Kohei Hasegawa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.