Literature DB >> 25858820

Sample entropy predicts lifesaving interventions in trauma patients with normal vital signs.

L Naraghi1, A Y Mejaddam1, O A Birkhan1, Y Chang1, C M Cropano1, T Mesar1, A Larentzakis1, M Peev1, A C Sideris1, G M Van der Wilden1, A M Imam1, J O Hwabejire1, G C Velmahos1, P J Fagenholz1, D Yeh1, M A de Moya1, D R King2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Heart rate complexity, commonly described as a "new vital sign," has shown promise in predicting injury severity, but its use in clinical practice is not yet widely adopted. We previously demonstrated the ability of this noninvasive technology to predict lifesaving interventions (LSIs) in trauma patients. This study was conducted to prospectively evaluate the utility of real-time, automated, noninvasive, instantaneous sample entropy (SampEn) analysis to predict the need for an LSI in a trauma alert population presenting with normal vital signs.
METHODS: Prospective enrollment of patients who met criteria for trauma team activation and presented with normal vital signs was conducted at a level I trauma center. High-fidelity electrocardiogram recording was used to calculate SampEn and SD of the normal-to-normal R-R interval (SDNN) continuously in real time for 2 hours with a portable, handheld device. Patients who received an LSI were compared to patients without any intervention (non-LSI). Multivariable analysis was performed to control for differences between the groups. Treating clinicians were blinded to results.
RESULTS: Of 129 patients enrolled, 38 (29%) received 136 LSIs within 24 hours of hospital arrival. Initial systolic blood pressure was similar in both groups. Lifesaving intervention patients had a lower Glasgow Coma Scale. The mean SampEn on presentation was 0.7 (0.4-1.2) in the LSI group compared to 1.5 (1.1-2.0) in the non-LSI group (P < .0001). The area under the curve with initial SampEn alone was 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.81) and increased to 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.98) after adding sedation to the model. Sample entropy of less than 0.8 yields sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of 58%, 86%, 82%, and 65%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 76% for predicting an LSI. SD of the normal-to-normal R-R interval had no predictive value.
CONCLUSIONS: In trauma patients with normal presenting vital signs, decreased SampEn is an independent predictor of the need for LSI. Real-time SampEn analysis may be a useful adjunct to standard vital signs monitoring. Adoption of real-time, instantaneous SampEn monitoring for trauma patients, especially in resource-constrained environments, should be considered.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Entropy; Noninvasive; Screening; Trauma; Vital

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25858820     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.03.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Crit Care        ISSN: 0883-9441            Impact factor:   3.425


  3 in total

1.  Sample Entropy in Electrocardiogram During Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Takuya Horie; Naoto Burioka; Takashi Amisaki; Eiji Shimizu
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 1.641

2.  Impact of predictive analytics based on continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring in a surgical and trauma intensive care unit.

Authors:  Caroline M Ruminski; Matthew T Clark; Douglas E Lake; Rebecca R Kitzmiller; Jessica Keim-Malpass; Matthew P Robertson; Theresa R Simons; J Randall Moorman; J Forrest Calland
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 1.977

3.  An increase in heart rate variability can be an index for end point of resuscitation in trauma patients.

Authors:  Ali Foroutan; Shahram Paydar; Seyyed Taghi Heydari; Leila Mohammadi; Farnaz Rahbar
Journal:  Chin J Traumatol       Date:  2019-04-16
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.