Literature DB >> 32185616

Metrology part 2: Procedures for the validation of major measurement quality criteria and measuring instrument properties.

Pierre Squara1, Thomas W L Scheeren2, Hollmann D Aya3, Jan Bakker4,5,6,7, Maurizio Cecconi8, Sharon Einav9, Manu L N G Malbrain10,11, Xavier Monnet12, Daniel A Reuter13, Iwan C C van der Horst14, Bernd Saugel15,16.   

Abstract

A measurement is always afflicted with some degree of uncertainty. A correct understanding of the different types of uncertainty, their naming, and their definition is of crucial importance for an appropriate use of the measuring instruments. However, in perioperative and intensive care medicine, the metrological requirements for measuring instruments are poorly defined and often used spuriously. The correct use of metrological terms is also of crucial importance in validation studies. The European Union published a new directive on medical devices, mentioning that in the case of devices with a measuring function, the notified body is involved in all aspects relating to the conformity of the device with the metrological requirements. It is therefore the task of scientific societies to establish the standards in their area of expertise. After adopting the same understandings and definitions (part 1), the different procedures for the validation of major quality criteria of measuring devices must be consensually established. In this metrologic review (part 2), we review the terms and definitions of validation, some basic processes leading to the display of an indication from a physiologic signal, and procedures for the validation of measuring instrument properties, with specific focus on perioperative and intensive care medicine including appropriate examples.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiovascular dynamics; Critical care; Hemodynamic monitoring; Perioperative medicine; Statistics

Year:  2020        PMID: 32185616      PMCID: PMC7889542          DOI: 10.1007/s10877-020-00495-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  7 in total

Review 1.  Cardiac output monitoring: how to choose the optimal method for the individual patient.

Authors:  Bernd Saugel; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.687

2.  Cardiac output method comparison studies: the relation of the precision of agreement and the precision of method.

Authors:  Alexander Hapfelmeier; Maurizio Cecconi; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2015-05-31       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 3.  Methodology of method comparison studies evaluating the validity of cardiac output monitors: a stepwise approach and checklist.

Authors:  L J Montenij; W F Buhre; J R Jansen; C L Kruitwagen; E E de Waal
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 9.166

4.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Error Grid Analysis for Arterial Pressure Method Comparison Studies.

Authors:  Bernd Saugel; Oliver Grothe; Julia Y Nicklas
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  Noninvasive cardiac output monitoring (NICOM): a clinical validation.

Authors:  Pierre Squara; Dominique Denjean; Philippe Estagnasie; Alain Brusset; Jean Claude Dib; Claude Dubois
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-04-26       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  How Should Blood Glucose Meter System Analytical Performance Be Assessed?

Authors:  David A Simmons
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-08-31
  7 in total
  5 in total

1.  Agreement between continuous and intermittent pulmonary artery thermodilution for cardiac output measurement in perioperative and intensive care medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Karim Kouz; Frederic Michard; Alina Bergholz; Christina Vokuhl; Luisa Briesenick; Phillip Hoppe; Moritz Flick; Gerhard Schön; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 9.097

2.  Non-invasive measurement of pulse pressure variation using a finger-cuff method (CNAP system): a validation study in patients having neurosurgery.

Authors:  Moritz Flick; Phillip Hoppe; Jasmin Matin Mehr; Luisa Briesenick; Karim Kouz; Gillis Greiwe; Jürgen Fortin; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 1.977

Review 3.  Devices Used to Measure Force-Time Characteristics of Spinal Manipulations and Mobilizations: A Mixed-Methods Scoping Review on Metrologic Properties and Factors Influencing Use.

Authors:  Marie-Andrée Mercier; Philippe Rousseau; Martha Funabashi; Martin Descarreaux; Isabelle Pagé
Journal:  Front Pain Res (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-10-29

Review 4.  Timing errors and temporal uncertainty in clinical databases-A narrative review.

Authors:  Andrew J Goodwin; Danny Eytan; William Dixon; Sebastian D Goodfellow; Zakary Doherty; Robert W Greer; Alistair McEwan; Mark Tracy; Peter C Laussen; Azadeh Assadi; Mjaye Mazwi
Journal:  Front Digit Health       Date:  2022-08-18

5.  Non-invasive measurement of pulse pressure variation using a finger-cuff method in obese patients having laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Moritz Flick; Roman Schumann; Phillip Hoppe; Iwona Bonney; Wilbert Wesselink; Bernd Saugel
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 1.977

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.