ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2014
Does repeat Hb measurement within 2 hours after a normal initial Hb in stable trauma patients add value to trauma evaluation?
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early CT scanning in the emergency department in patients with penetrating injuries: does it affect outcome?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn our level I trauma center, it is considered common practice to repeat blood haemoglobin measurements in patients within 2 h after admission. However, the rationale behind this procedure is elusive and can be considered labour-intensive, especially in patients in whom haemorrhaging is not to be expected. The aim of this study was to assess the value of the repeated Hb measurement (r-Hb) within 2 h in adult trauma patients without evidence of haemodynamic instability.
methodsThe local trauma registry was used to identify all trauma patients without evidence of haemodynamic instability from January 2009 to December 2010. Patients in whom no initial blood Hb measurement (i-Hb) was done on admission, referrals, and patients without risk for traumatic injuries or haemorrhage based upon mechanism of injury (e.g. inhalation or drowning injury) were excluded.
resultsA total of 1,537 patients were included in the study, 1,246 of which did not present with signs of haemodynamic instability. Median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 5 (interquartile range (IQR) 1 to 13), 22% of the patients were multitrauma patients (ISS > 15). A normal i-Hb was found in 914 patients (73%). Of the 914 patients with a normal i-Hb, 639 (70%) had a normal r-Hb, while in 127 patients (14%), an abnormal r-Hb was found. In none of these patients, the abnormal r-Hb led to new diagnoses. In 148 patients (16%), no repeated Hb measurement was done without clinical consequences.
conclusionWe conclude that repeated blood Hb measurement within 2 h after admission in stable, adult trauma patients with a normal initial Hb concentration does not add value to a trauma patient's evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.