OBJECTIVES: Aberrant automated blood pressure (BP) readings during caesarean delivery may lead to disruptions in monitoring. The present study compared the frequency of aberrant BP readings across two types of commercially available BP monitoring systems in use during caesarean delivery. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study using two comparable patient cohorts that resulted from simultaneous introduction of two types of monitors into a single obstetric surgical center in which similar patients were treated for the same surgical procedure by the same set of clinicians during the same year. Our primary hypothesis was that aberrant readings were significantly associated with the type of monitor being used for BP measurement, controlling for a variety of relevant covariates as specified in the analytic plan. RESULTS: A total of 1418 cesarean delivery patients met inclusion criteria. Gaps of at least 6 min in machine-captured BP readings occurred in 159 (21.1%) of cases done in the operating room using a Datex-Ohmeda monitor vs. 183 (27.5%) of cases in the operating rooms using Phillips monitors (P = 0.005). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the relative odds of the occurrence of monitoring gaps was 35% higher in rooms with the Phillips BP monitors as compared to the Datex-Ohmeda monitor while controlling for pre-specified covariates (odds ratio = 1.35, 95% confidence interval = 1.04-1.74, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The present analysis suggests that aberrant BP readings for parturients undergoing caesarean delivery are significantly different between the two types of automated BP monitoring systems used in the operating rooms at our institution.
OBJECTIVES: Aberrant automated blood pressure (BP) readings during caesarean delivery may lead to disruptions in monitoring. The present study compared the frequency of aberrant BP readings across two types of commercially available BP monitoring systems in use during caesarean delivery. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study using two comparable patient cohorts that resulted from simultaneous introduction of two types of monitors into a single obstetric surgical center in which similar patients were treated for the same surgical procedure by the same set of clinicians during the same year. Our primary hypothesis was that aberrant readings were significantly associated with the type of monitor being used for BP measurement, controlling for a variety of relevant covariates as specified in the analytic plan. RESULTS: A total of 1418 cesarean delivery patients met inclusion criteria. Gaps of at least 6 min in machine-captured BP readings occurred in 159 (21.1%) of cases done in the operating room using a Datex-Ohmeda monitor vs. 183 (27.5%) of cases in the operating rooms using Phillips monitors (P = 0.005). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the relative odds of the occurrence of monitoring gaps was 35% higher in rooms with the Phillips BP monitors as compared to the Datex-Ohmeda monitor while controlling for pre-specified covariates (odds ratio = 1.35, 95% confidence interval = 1.04-1.74, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The present analysis suggests that aberrant BP readings for parturients undergoing caesarean delivery are significantly different between the two types of automated BP monitoring systems used in the operating rooms at our institution.
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-10-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: William Gerin; Amy R Schwartz; Joseph E Schwartz; Thomas G Pickering; Karina W Davidson; Jonathan Bress; Eoin O'Brien; Neil Atkins Journal: Blood Press Monit Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 1.444
Authors: Michael R Mathis; Timur Z Dubovoy; Matthew D Caldwell; Milo C Engoren Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: Linden O Lee; Brian T Bateman; Sachin Kheterpal; Thomas T Klumpner; Michelle Housey; Michael F Aziz; Karen W Hand; Mark MacEachern; Christopher G Goodier; Jeffrey Bernstein; Melissa E Bauer Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Sachin Kheterpal; Michelle T Vaughn; Timur Z Dubovoy; Nirav J Shah; Lori D Bash; Douglas A Colquhoun; Amy M Shanks; Michael R Mathis; Roy G Soto; Amit Bardia; Karsten Bartels; Patrick J McCormick; Robert B Schonberger; Leif Saager Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Douglas A Colquhoun; Amy M Shanks; Steven R Kapeles; Nirav Shah; Leif Saager; Michelle T Vaughn; Kathryn Buehler; Michael L Burns; Kevin K Tremper; Robert E Freundlich; Michael Aziz; Sachin Kheterpal; Michael R Mathis Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 5.108