Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit
Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for managing patients with hypotension. There are differences between invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) and noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements. However, the clinical applicability of these differences in patients with shock [need for vas...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of emergency medicine 2021-08, Vol.46, p.109-115 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 115 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 109 |
container_title | The American journal of emergency medicine |
container_volume | 46 |
creator | Keville, Meaghan P. Gelmann, Dominique Hollis, Grace Beher, Richa Raffman, Alison Tanveer, Saman Jones, Kevin Parker, Brandon M. Haase, Daniel J. Tran, Quincy K. |
description | Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for managing patients with hypotension. There are differences between invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) and noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements. However, the clinical applicability of these differences in patients with shock [need for vasopressor or serum lactate ≥ 4 millimole per liter (mmol/L)] has not been reported. This study investigated differences in IABP and NIBP as well as changes in clinical management in critically ill patients with shock.
This was a retrospective study involving adult patients admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU). Adult patients who received IABP upon admission between 01/01/2017–12/31/2017 with non-hypertensive diseases were eligible. The primary outcome, clinically relevant difference (CRD), was defined as difference of 10 mm of mercury (mmHg) between IABP and NIBP and change of blood pressure management according to goal mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg. We performed forward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to measure associations.
Sample size calculation recommended 200 patients, and we analyzed 263. 121 (46%) patients had shock, 23 (9%) patients had CRD. Each mmol/L increase in serum lactate was associated with 11% higher likelihood of having CRD (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.002–1.2). Peripheral artery disease and any kidney disease was significantly associated with higher likelihood of MAP difference ≥ 10 mmHg.
Approximately 9% of patients with shock had clinically-relevant MAP difference. Higher serum lactate was associated with higher likelihood of CRD. Until further studies are available, clinicians should consider using IABP in patients with shock. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.03.012 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2503686522</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0735675721001972</els_id><sourcerecordid>2503686522</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-bf9b13252bedd5ffe411a94c4bad2e375417a9f99d456219e4390ee844e2d65e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS1ERYfCC7BAlth0k9S_8RixqUaFIlXqBtaW49y0Dok9tR2kvj0epnTRBatrXX_n6OochD5Q0lJCu4uptRMsLSOMtoS3hLJXaEMlZ82WKvoabYjisumUVKfobc4TIZQKKd6gU86VEEp0GzRfpgLJ2xnHhN06jnifIOc1wWe8m33wrn7V1eBdiSlju8Rwh_e2eAglYx9wvo_u1-FhsUu-_BU4mwBXnzU7XyobA16DL-_QyWjnDO-f5hn6-fXqx-66ubn99n13edM4vhWl6UfdU84k62EY5DiCoNRq4URvBwZcSUGV1aPWg5AdoxoE1wRgKwSwoZPAz9D50Xef4sMKuZjFZwfzbAPENRsmCe-2nWSsop9eoFNcU6jXVUpKLZUSulLsSLkUc04wmn3yi02PhhJz6MJM5tCFOXRhCDe1iyr6-GS99gsMz5J_4VfgyxGAmsVvD8nUuCC4GnYCV8wQ_f_8_wCNOZsW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2555957749</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Keville, Meaghan P. ; Gelmann, Dominique ; Hollis, Grace ; Beher, Richa ; Raffman, Alison ; Tanveer, Saman ; Jones, Kevin ; Parker, Brandon M. ; Haase, Daniel J. ; Tran, Quincy K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Keville, Meaghan P. ; Gelmann, Dominique ; Hollis, Grace ; Beher, Richa ; Raffman, Alison ; Tanveer, Saman ; Jones, Kevin ; Parker, Brandon M. ; Haase, Daniel J. ; Tran, Quincy K.</creatorcontrib><description>Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for managing patients with hypotension. There are differences between invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) and noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements. However, the clinical applicability of these differences in patients with shock [need for vasopressor or serum lactate ≥ 4 millimole per liter (mmol/L)] has not been reported. This study investigated differences in IABP and NIBP as well as changes in clinical management in critically ill patients with shock.
This was a retrospective study involving adult patients admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU). Adult patients who received IABP upon admission between 01/01/2017–12/31/2017 with non-hypertensive diseases were eligible. The primary outcome, clinically relevant difference (CRD), was defined as difference of 10 mm of mercury (mmHg) between IABP and NIBP and change of blood pressure management according to goal mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg. We performed forward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to measure associations.
Sample size calculation recommended 200 patients, and we analyzed 263. 121 (46%) patients had shock, 23 (9%) patients had CRD. Each mmol/L increase in serum lactate was associated with 11% higher likelihood of having CRD (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.002–1.2). Peripheral artery disease and any kidney disease was significantly associated with higher likelihood of MAP difference ≥ 10 mmHg.
Approximately 9% of patients with shock had clinically-relevant MAP difference. Higher serum lactate was associated with higher likelihood of CRD. Until further studies are available, clinicians should consider using IABP in patients with shock.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0735-6757</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8171</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.03.012</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33744746</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Blood pressure ; Clinically relevant difference ; Critical care ; Data collection ; Emergency medical care ; Hypertension ; Hypotension ; Invasive arterial blood pressure ; Kidney diseases ; Lactic acid ; Mercury ; Noninvasive arterial blood pressure ; Patients ; Sepsis ; Shock ; Standard deviation ; Vascular diseases</subject><ispartof>The American journal of emergency medicine, 2021-08, Vol.46, p.109-115</ispartof><rights>2021</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Aug 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-bf9b13252bedd5ffe411a94c4bad2e375417a9f99d456219e4390ee844e2d65e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-bf9b13252bedd5ffe411a94c4bad2e375417a9f99d456219e4390ee844e2d65e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735675721001972$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33744746$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Keville, Meaghan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gelmann, Dominique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollis, Grace</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beher, Richa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raffman, Alison</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanveer, Saman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Brandon M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haase, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tran, Quincy K.</creatorcontrib><title>Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit</title><title>The American journal of emergency medicine</title><addtitle>Am J Emerg Med</addtitle><description>Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for managing patients with hypotension. There are differences between invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) and noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements. However, the clinical applicability of these differences in patients with shock [need for vasopressor or serum lactate ≥ 4 millimole per liter (mmol/L)] has not been reported. This study investigated differences in IABP and NIBP as well as changes in clinical management in critically ill patients with shock.
This was a retrospective study involving adult patients admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU). Adult patients who received IABP upon admission between 01/01/2017–12/31/2017 with non-hypertensive diseases were eligible. The primary outcome, clinically relevant difference (CRD), was defined as difference of 10 mm of mercury (mmHg) between IABP and NIBP and change of blood pressure management according to goal mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg. We performed forward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to measure associations.
Sample size calculation recommended 200 patients, and we analyzed 263. 121 (46%) patients had shock, 23 (9%) patients had CRD. Each mmol/L increase in serum lactate was associated with 11% higher likelihood of having CRD (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.002–1.2). Peripheral artery disease and any kidney disease was significantly associated with higher likelihood of MAP difference ≥ 10 mmHg.
Approximately 9% of patients with shock had clinically-relevant MAP difference. Higher serum lactate was associated with higher likelihood of CRD. Until further studies are available, clinicians should consider using IABP in patients with shock.</description><subject>Blood pressure</subject><subject>Clinically relevant difference</subject><subject>Critical care</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Hypotension</subject><subject>Invasive arterial blood pressure</subject><subject>Kidney diseases</subject><subject>Lactic acid</subject><subject>Mercury</subject><subject>Noninvasive arterial blood pressure</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Sepsis</subject><subject>Shock</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Vascular diseases</subject><issn>0735-6757</issn><issn>1532-8171</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS1ERYfCC7BAlth0k9S_8RixqUaFIlXqBtaW49y0Dok9tR2kvj0epnTRBatrXX_n6OochD5Q0lJCu4uptRMsLSOMtoS3hLJXaEMlZ82WKvoabYjisumUVKfobc4TIZQKKd6gU86VEEp0GzRfpgLJ2xnHhN06jnifIOc1wWe8m33wrn7V1eBdiSlju8Rwh_e2eAglYx9wvo_u1-FhsUu-_BU4mwBXnzU7XyobA16DL-_QyWjnDO-f5hn6-fXqx-66ubn99n13edM4vhWl6UfdU84k62EY5DiCoNRq4URvBwZcSUGV1aPWg5AdoxoE1wRgKwSwoZPAz9D50Xef4sMKuZjFZwfzbAPENRsmCe-2nWSsop9eoFNcU6jXVUpKLZUSulLsSLkUc04wmn3yi02PhhJz6MJM5tCFOXRhCDe1iyr6-GS99gsMz5J_4VfgyxGAmsVvD8nUuCC4GnYCV8wQ_f_8_wCNOZsW</recordid><startdate>20210801</startdate><enddate>20210801</enddate><creator>Keville, Meaghan P.</creator><creator>Gelmann, Dominique</creator><creator>Hollis, Grace</creator><creator>Beher, Richa</creator><creator>Raffman, Alison</creator><creator>Tanveer, Saman</creator><creator>Jones, Kevin</creator><creator>Parker, Brandon M.</creator><creator>Haase, Daniel J.</creator><creator>Tran, Quincy K.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210801</creationdate><title>Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit</title><author>Keville, Meaghan P. ; Gelmann, Dominique ; Hollis, Grace ; Beher, Richa ; Raffman, Alison ; Tanveer, Saman ; Jones, Kevin ; Parker, Brandon M. ; Haase, Daniel J. ; Tran, Quincy K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-bf9b13252bedd5ffe411a94c4bad2e375417a9f99d456219e4390ee844e2d65e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Blood pressure</topic><topic>Clinically relevant difference</topic><topic>Critical care</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Hypotension</topic><topic>Invasive arterial blood pressure</topic><topic>Kidney diseases</topic><topic>Lactic acid</topic><topic>Mercury</topic><topic>Noninvasive arterial blood pressure</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Sepsis</topic><topic>Shock</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Vascular diseases</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Keville, Meaghan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gelmann, Dominique</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollis, Grace</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beher, Richa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raffman, Alison</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tanveer, Saman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Brandon M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haase, Daniel J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tran, Quincy K.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of emergency medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Keville, Meaghan P.</au><au>Gelmann, Dominique</au><au>Hollis, Grace</au><au>Beher, Richa</au><au>Raffman, Alison</au><au>Tanveer, Saman</au><au>Jones, Kevin</au><au>Parker, Brandon M.</au><au>Haase, Daniel J.</au><au>Tran, Quincy K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of emergency medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Emerg Med</addtitle><date>2021-08-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>46</volume><spage>109</spage><epage>115</epage><pages>109-115</pages><issn>0735-6757</issn><eissn>1532-8171</eissn><abstract>Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for managing patients with hypotension. There are differences between invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) and noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements. However, the clinical applicability of these differences in patients with shock [need for vasopressor or serum lactate ≥ 4 millimole per liter (mmol/L)] has not been reported. This study investigated differences in IABP and NIBP as well as changes in clinical management in critically ill patients with shock.
This was a retrospective study involving adult patients admitted to the Critical Care Resuscitation Unit (CCRU). Adult patients who received IABP upon admission between 01/01/2017–12/31/2017 with non-hypertensive diseases were eligible. The primary outcome, clinically relevant difference (CRD), was defined as difference of 10 mm of mercury (mmHg) between IABP and NIBP and change of blood pressure management according to goal mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mmHg. We performed forward stepwise multivariable logistic regression to measure associations.
Sample size calculation recommended 200 patients, and we analyzed 263. 121 (46%) patients had shock, 23 (9%) patients had CRD. Each mmol/L increase in serum lactate was associated with 11% higher likelihood of having CRD (OR 1.11, 95%CI 1.002–1.2). Peripheral artery disease and any kidney disease was significantly associated with higher likelihood of MAP difference ≥ 10 mmHg.
Approximately 9% of patients with shock had clinically-relevant MAP difference. Higher serum lactate was associated with higher likelihood of CRD. Until further studies are available, clinicians should consider using IABP in patients with shock.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33744746</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajem.2021.03.012</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0735-6757 |
ispartof | The American journal of emergency medicine, 2021-08, Vol.46, p.109-115 |
issn | 0735-6757 1532-8171 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2503686522 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Blood pressure Clinically relevant difference Critical care Data collection Emergency medical care Hypertension Hypotension Invasive arterial blood pressure Kidney diseases Lactic acid Mercury Noninvasive arterial blood pressure Patients Sepsis Shock Standard deviation Vascular diseases |
title | Arterial or cuff pressure: Clinical predictors among patients in shock in a critical care resuscitation unit |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T16%3A12%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Arterial%20or%20cuff%20pressure:%20Clinical%20predictors%20among%20patients%20in%20shock%20in%20a%20critical%20care%20resuscitation%20unit&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20emergency%20medicine&rft.au=Keville,%20Meaghan%20P.&rft.date=2021-08-01&rft.volume=46&rft.spage=109&rft.epage=115&rft.pages=109-115&rft.issn=0735-6757&rft.eissn=1532-8171&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajem.2021.03.012&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2503686522%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2555957749&rft_id=info:pmid/33744746&rft_els_id=S0735675721001972&rfr_iscdi=true |