Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36653739›Full record

Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2023

Agreement between Capillary Refill Time measured at Finger and Earlobe sites in different positions: a pilot prospective study on healthy volunteers.

Luigi La Via, Filippo Sanfilippo, Carlotta Continella, Tania Triolo, Antonio Messina, Chiara Robba, Marinella Astuto, Glenn Hernandez, Alberto Noto

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Passive leg raising test versus rapid fluid challenge in critically ill medical patients.Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Early peripheral perfusion monitoring in septic shock.European journal of medical research · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Analysis of P(v-a)COJournal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. 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

9 authors.

Luigi La ViaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico - San Marco", 95123, Catania, Italy. luigilavia7@gmail.com.
Filippo SanfilippoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico - San Marco", 95123, Catania, Italy.
Carlotta ContinellaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico - San Marco", 95123, Catania, Italy.
Tania TrioloDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico - San Marco", 95123, Catania, Italy.
Antonio MessinaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center-IRCCS, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Chiara RobbaAnesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, 16100, Genoa, Italy.
Marinella AstutoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico - San Marco", 95123, Catania, Italy.
Glenn HernandezDepartamento de Medicina Intensiva, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Alberto NotoDivision of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Messina, Policlinico''G. Martino'', 98121, Messina, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCapillary Refill Time (CRT) is a marker of peripheral perfusion usually performed at fingertip; however, its evaluation at other sites/position may be advantageous. Moreover, arm position during CRT assessment has not been fully standardized.

methodsWe performed a pilot prospective observational study in 82 healthy volunteers. CRT was assessed: a) in standard position with participants in semi-recumbent position; b) at 30° forearm elevation, c and d) at earlobe site in semi-recumbent and supine position. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to calculate bias and limits of agreement (LoA). Correlation was investigated with Pearson test.

resultsStandard finger CRT values (1.04 s [0.80;1.39]) were similar to the earlobe semi-recumbent ones (1.10 s [0.90;1.26]; p = 0.52), with Bias 0.02 ± 0.18 s (LoA -0.33;0.37); correlation was weak but significant (r = 0.28 [0.7;0.47]; p = 0.01). Conversely, standard finger CRT was significantly longer than earlobe supine CRT (0.88 s [0.75;1.06]; p < 0.001) with Bias 0.22 ± 0.4 s (LoA -0.56;1.0), and no correlation (r = 0,12 [-0,09;0,33]; p = 0.27]. As compared with standard finger CRT, measurement with 30° forearm elevation was significantly longer (1.17 s [0.93;1.41] p = 0.03), with Bias -0.07 ± 0.3 s (LoA -0.61;0.47) and with a significant correlation of moderate degree (r = 0.67 [0.53;0.77]; p < 0.001).

conclusionsIn healthy volunteers, the elevation of the forearm significantly prolongs CRT values. CRT measured at the earlobe in semi-recumbent position may represent a valid surrogate when access to the finger is not feasible, whilst earlobe CRT measured in supine position yields different results. Research is needed in critically ill patients to evaluate accuracy and precision at different sites/positions.

Indexed as

CapillariesHemodynamicsFingersHealthy VolunteersHumansProspective StudiesAccuracyCritical illnessHemodynamicsIntensive carePerfusionPrecision

Identifiers

PMID36653739
PMCPMC9847031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.