Skip to main content

Pulse oximetry ...the cochrane analysis....does it really help?

The proliferation of monitors in anaesthesia is obvious. The goal of monitoring as an adjunct to clinical decision making is to directly reduce the incidence of complications. This is based on the premise that unambiguous and accurate information, which is readily interpretable and available, will help the anaesthesiologist in choosing and initiating correct therapeutic interventions. The unanswered question is whether the individual anaesthesiologist's performance—the human factor—is perhaps far more important than implementing new monitoring equipment or other new safety initiatives in a situation in which we wish to reduce the rate of postoperative complications. However, we do not know whether pulse oximetry might protect against the human factor when that factor is negligent.

Pulse oximetry monitoring substantially reduced the extent of perioperative hypoxaemia, enabled the detection and treatment of hypoxaemia and related respiratory events and promoted several changes in patient care. The implementation of perioperative pulse oximetry monitoring was not, however, the breakthrough that could reduce the number of postoperative complications. The question remains whether pulse oximetry improves outcomes in other situations. Pulse oximetry has already been adopted into clinical practice all over the world. It may be a tool that guides anaesthesiologists in the daily management of patients, in teaching situations, in emergencies and especially in caring for children. Although results of studies are not conclusive, the data suggest that there may be a benefit for a population at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Results of the studies of general surgery indicate that perioperative monitoring with pulse oximetry does not improve clinically relevant outcomes, effectiveness or efficiency of care despite an intense, methodical collection of data from a large population.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Driving Pressure in ARDS: A new concept!

Driving Pressure and Survival in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Marcelo B.P. Amato, M.D., Maureen O. Meade, M.D., Arthur S. Slutsky, M.D., Laurent Brochard, M.D., Eduardo L.V. Costa, M.D., David A. Schoenfeld, Ph.D., Thomas E. Stewart, M.D., Matthias Briel, M.D., Daniel Talmor, M.D., M.P.H., Alain Mercat, M.D., Jean-Christophe M. Richard, M.D., Carlos R.R. Carvalho, M.D., and Roy G. Brower, M.D. N Engl J Med 2015; 372:747-755 February 19, 2015 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1410639 BACKGROUND Mechanical-ventilation strategies that use lower end-inspiratory (plateau) airway pressures, lower tidal volumes (V T ), and higher positive end-expiratory pressures (PEEPs) can improve survival in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but the relative importance of each of these components is uncertain. Because respiratory-system compliance (C RS ) is strongly related to the volume of aerated remaining functional lung during disease (termed functional lung size)...

Anaphylaxis updates part 2- Empty Ventricle Syndrome

Patients with anaphylaxis should not suddenly sit, stand, or be placed in the upright position. Instead, they should be placed on the back with their lower extremities elevated or, if they are experiencing respiratory distress or vomiting, they should be placed in a position of comfort with their lower extremities elevated. This accomplishes 2 therapeutic goals: 1) preservation of fluid in the circulation (the central vascular compartment), an important step in managing distributive shock; and 2) prevention of the empty vena cava/empty ventricle syndrome, which can occur within seconds when patients with anaphylaxis suddenly assume or are placed in an upright position. Patients with this syndrome are at high risk for sudden death. They are unlikely to respond to epinephrine regardless of route of administration, because it does not reach the heart and therefore cannot be circulated throughout the body

Epidural catheter tests...not only the test dose

Siphon test The catheter is held upright and a fluid level sought. If the catheter is then elevated, the fluid level should fall (see inset) as the fluid siphons in to the epidural space, which is usually under negative pressure compared with atmospheric. If the fluid column continues to rise, this may suggest subarachnoid placement. The siphon test can be reassuring, but is not mandatory. Aspiration  This should be considered mandatory. The Luer connector is attached to the catheter and a syringe is used to apply negative pressure. Free and continued aspiration of clear fluid can indicate subarachnoid placement of the catheter. However, if saline has been used for loss of resistance, it is not unusual for a small amount of this to be aspirated. If there is doubt, the aspirated fluid can be tested for glucose (cerebrospinal fluid will generally test positive) or mixed with thiopentone (cerebrospinal fluid forms a precipitate). If blood is freely and continuously aspirated, this sug...