C L Duus1,2, E K Aasvang2, R M Olsen3, H B D Sørensen3, L N Jørgensen4, M P Achiam5, C S Meyhoff1. 1. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, The Abdominal Centre, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Biomedical Engineering, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark. 4. Digestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, The Abdominal Centre, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Millions of patients undergo major abdominal surgery worldwide each year, and the post-operative phase carries a high risk of respiratory and circulatory complications. Standard ward observation of patients includes vital sign registration at regular intervals. Patients may deteriorate between measurements, and this may be detected by continuous monitoring. The aim of this study was to compare the number of micro events detected by continuous monitoring to those documented by the widely used standardized Early Warning Score (EWS). METHODS: Fifty patients were continuously monitored with peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 ), heart rate (HR), and respiratory rate (RR) the first 4 days after major abdominal cancer surgery. EWS was monitored as routine practice. Number and duration of events were analyzed using Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Continuous monitoring detected a SpO2 <92% in 98% of patients vs 16% of patients detected by EWS (P < .0001). Micro events of SpO2 <92% lasting longer than 60 minutes were found in 58% of patients by continuous monitoring vs 16% by the EWS (P < .0001). Fifty-two percent of patients had micro events of SpO2 <85% lasting longer than 10 minutes. Continuous monitoring found tachycardia in 60% of patients vs 6% by the EWS. Frequency of events for bradycardia, tachypnea, and bradypnea showed similar patterns. CONCLUSION: Very low SpO2 and tachycardia in post-operative patients are common and under-diagnosed by the EWS. Continuous monitoring can discover these micro events and potentially contribute to earlier detection and, potentially, result in prevention of clinical complications.
INTRODUCTION: Millions of patients undergo major abdominal surgery worldwide each year, and the post-operative phase carries a high risk of respiratory and circulatory complications. Standard ward observation of patients includes vital sign registration at regular intervals. Patients may deteriorate between measurements, and this may be detected by continuous monitoring. The aim of this study was to compare the number of micro events detected by continuous monitoring to those documented by the widely used standardized Early Warning Score (EWS). METHODS: Fifty patients were continuously monitored with peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 ), heart rate (HR), and respiratory rate (RR) the first 4 days after major abdominal cancer surgery. EWS was monitored as routine practice. Number and duration of events were analyzed using Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Continuous monitoring detected a SpO2 <92% in 98% of patients vs 16% of patients detected by EWS (P < .0001). Micro events of SpO2 <92% lasting longer than 60 minutes were found in 58% of patients by continuous monitoring vs 16% by the EWS (P < .0001). Fifty-two percent of patients had micro events of SpO2 <85% lasting longer than 10 minutes. Continuous monitoring found tachycardia in 60% of patients vs 6% by the EWS. Frequency of events for bradycardia, tachypnea, and bradypnea showed similar patterns. CONCLUSION: Very low SpO2 and tachycardia in post-operative patients are common and under-diagnosed by the EWS. Continuous monitoring can discover these micro events and potentially contribute to earlier detection and, potentially, result in prevention of clinical complications.
Authors: Helge B D Sørensen; Eske K Aasvang; Christian S Meyhoff; Mikkel Elvekjaer; Søren M Rasmussen; Katja K Grønbæk; Celeste M Porsbjerg; Jens-Ulrik Jensen; Camilla Haahr-Raunkjær; Jesper Mølgaard; Marlene Søgaard Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 5.472
Authors: Jobbe P L Leenen; Eline M Dijkman; Joris D van Dijk; Henderik L van Westreenen; Cor Kalkman; Lisette Schoonhoven; Gijsbert A Patijn Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: William Xu; Armen A Gharibans; Ian P Bissett; Gregory O'Grady; Cameron I Wells; Carlos Areia; Christopher Biggs; Mauro Santos; Neal Thurley; Stephen Gerry; Lionel Tarassenko; Peter Watkinson; Sarah Vollam Journal: Crit Care Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Jobbe P L Leenen; Henriëtte J M Rasing; Joris D van Dijk; Cor J Kalkman; Lisette Schoonhoven; Gijs A Patijn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Camilla Haahr-Raunkjaer; Jesper Mølgaard; Mikkel Elvekjaer; Søren M Rasmussen; Michael P Achiam; Lars N Jorgensen; Mette I V Søgaard; Katja K Grønbaek; Anne-Britt Oxbøll; Helge B D Sørensen; Christian S Meyhoff; Eske K Aasvang Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2022-02-28 Impact factor: 2.274
Authors: Frederik C Loft; Søren M Rasmussen; Mikkel Elvekjaer; Camilla Haahr-Raunkjaer; Helge B D Sørensen; Eske K Aasvang; Christian S Meyhoff Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2022-03-14 Impact factor: 2.274