ArticleBMC nursing2022
Clinical evaluation for the pharyngeal oxygen saturation measurements in shocked patients.
Article in BMC nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMonitoring oxygen saturation in shocked patients is a challenging nursing procedure. Shock syndrome alters peripheral tissue perfusion and hinders peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) measurements. Our study aimed to find a solution to this problem. The pharynx is expected to be an accurate SpO2 measurement site in shocked patients. We clinically evaluated the pharyngeal SpO2 measurements against the arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) measurements.
methodsA prospective cohort research design was used. This study included 168 adult shocked patients. They were admitted to five intensive care units from March to December 2020 in an Egyptian hospital. A wrap oximeter sensor was attached to the posterior surface of an oropharyngeal airway (OPA) by adhesive tape. The optical component of the sensor adhered to the pharyngeal surface after the OPA insertion. Simultaneous pharyngeal peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) and arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2) measurements were recorded. The pharyngeal SpO2 was clinically evaluated. Also, variables associated with the SpO2 bias were evaluated for their association with the pharyngeal SpO2 bias.
resultsThe pharyngeal SpO2 bias was - 0.44% with - 1.65 to 0.78% limits of agreement. The precision was 0.62, and the accuracy was 0.05. The sensitivity to detect mild and severe hypoxemia was 100%, while specificity to minimize false alarm of hypoxemia was 100% for mild hypoxemia and 99.4% for severe hypoxemia. None of the studied variables were significantly associated with the pharyngeal SpO2 bias.
conclusionThe pharyngeal SpO2 has a clinically acceptable bias, which is less than 0.5% with high precision, which is less than 2%.
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.