Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31696391›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2020

Zero-heat-flux core temperature monitoring system: an observational secondary analysis to evaluate agreement with naso-/oropharyngeal probe during anesthesia.

Nicholas West, Erin Cooke, Dan Morse, Richard N Merchant, Matthias Görges

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Evaluation of non-invasive sensors for monitoring core temperature.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicholas WestDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8382-5136
Erin CookeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2921-1701
Dan Morse3M Infection Prevention Division, 3M Corporation, St Paul, MN, USA.
Richard N MerchantDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8526-2477
Matthias GörgesDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. mgorges@bcchr.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2193-178X
University of British Columbia · CA3M (United States) · USRoyal Columbian Hospital · CA

Funding

3M Canada sponsored the original randomized controlled trial, from which the data for this secondary was extracted, and provided the 3M Bair HuggerTM temperature monitoring systems and sensors
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

General anesthesia impairs thermoregulation and contributes to perioperative hypothermia; core body temperature monitoring is recommended during surgical procedures lasting > 30 min. Zero-heat-flux core body temperature measurement systems enable continuous non-invasive perioperative monitoring. During a previous trial evaluating the benefits of preoperative forced-air warming, intraoperative temperatures were measured with both a zero-heat-flux sensor and a standard naso-/oropharyngeal temperature probe. The aim of this secondary analysis is to evaluate their agreement. ASA I-III patients, scheduled for elective, non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia, were enrolled. A zero-heat-flux sensor was placed on the participant's forehead preoperatively. Following induction of anesthesia, a "clinical" temperature probe was placed in the nasopharynx or oropharynx at the anesthesiologist's discretion. Temperature measurements from both sensors were recorded every 10 s. Agreement was analyzed using the Bland-Altman method, corrected for repeated measurements, and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient, and compared with existing studies. Data were collected in 194 patients with a median (interquartile range) age of 60 (49-69) years, during surgical procedures lasting 120 (89-185) min. The zero-heat-flux measurements had a mean bias of - 0.05 °C (zero-heat-flux lower) with 95% limits of agreement within - 0.68 to + 0.58 °C. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient was 0.823. The zero-heat-flux sensor demonstrated moderate agreement with the naso-/oropharyngeal temperature probe, which was not fully within the generally accepted ± 0.5 °C limit. This is consistent with previous studies. The zero-heat-flux system offers clinical utility for non-invasive and continuous core body temperature monitoring throughout the perioperative period using a single sensor.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaHot TemperatureAgedBody TemperatureHumansMiddle AgedMonitoring, IntraoperativeOropharynxTemperatureCore body temperaturePerioperative monitoringTemperature monitoring

Identifiers

PMID31696391
OpenAlexW2983770387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.