Mike Wells1, Lara Nicole Goldstein2, Giles Cattermole3. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine, Boca Raton, FL, USA. profmikewells@gmail.com. 2. Division of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. 3. Emergency Department, Princess Royal University Hospital, King's College Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Accurate drug dosing in obese patients requires an estimation of ideal body weight (IBW) or lean body weight (LBW) for dosing hydrophilic medications. Erroneous weight estimates during the management of adults requiring weight-based treatment may contribute to poor outcomes. Existing methods of IBW and LBW estimation or measurement are very difficult to use during emergency care. A new point-of-care model would be useful to provide rapid estimates of IBW and LBW for this purpose. METHODS: A model was derived based on the PAWPER XL-MAC tape, a pediatric weight estimation system which uses recumbent length and mid-arm circumference to estimate IBW and LBW. The new adult model was used to generate IBW and LBW estimations for a derivation sample (n = 33155) and a validation sample (n = 5926) from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) datasets. The model was developed in two steps, with calibration at each step, before being validated on an unused dataset. The outcome measure was to achieve >95% of IBW and LBW estimations within 20% of recognized reference standards (P20 > 95%) and >70% of estimations within 10% of these standards (P10 > 70%). RESULTS: The new model achieved a P20 of 100% and a P10 of 99.9% for IBW and a P20 of 98.3% and a P10 of 78.3% for LBW. This accuracy was maintained in both sexes, all ages, all ethnic groups, all lengths, and in all habitus types, except for the severely obese female subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The modified PAWPER XL-MAC model proved to be an accurate method of IBW and LBW estimation. It could, therefore, have an important role in facilitating emergency drug dose calculations in obese adult patients.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Accurate drug dosing in obese patients requires an estimation of ideal body weight (IBW) or lean body weight (LBW) for dosing hydrophilic medications. Erroneous weight estimates during the management of adults requiring weight-based treatment may contribute to poor outcomes. Existing methods of IBW and LBW estimation or measurement are very difficult to use during emergency care. A new point-of-care model would be useful to provide rapid estimates of IBW and LBW for this purpose. METHODS: A model was derived based on the PAWPER XL-MAC tape, a pediatric weight estimation system which uses recumbent length and mid-arm circumference to estimate IBW and LBW. The new adult model was used to generate IBW and LBW estimations for a derivation sample (n = 33155) and a validation sample (n = 5926) from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) datasets. The model was developed in two steps, with calibration at each step, before being validated on an unused dataset. The outcome measure was to achieve >95% of IBW and LBW estimations within 20% of recognized reference standards (P20 > 95%) and >70% of estimations within 10% of these standards (P10 > 70%). RESULTS: The new model achieved a P20 of 100% and a P10 of 99.9% for IBW and a P20 of 98.3% and a P10 of 78.3% for LBW. This accuracy was maintained in both sexes, all ages, all ethnic groups, all lengths, and in all habitus types, except for the severely obese female subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The modified PAWPER XL-MAC model proved to be an accurate method of IBW and LBW estimation. It could, therefore, have an important role in facilitating emergency drug dose calculations in obese adult patients.
Authors: Margreet W Harskamp-van Ginkel; Kevin D Hill; Kristian C Becker; Kristian Becker; Daniela Testoni; Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez; Daniel Gonzalez; Jeffrey S Barrett; Daniel K Benjamin; David A Siegel; Patricia Banks; Kevin M Watt Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 26.796