Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2025
Implementing prehospital invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring in critically ill patients-a prospective observational first year analysis.
Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07596446 (FEMART-1 Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
FEMART-1 Pilot Study
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Triglyceride-glucose and TyG-BMI indexes predict acute pancreatitis in adult critically ill patients admitted to intensive care.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Factors influencing invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring accuracy: a qualitative study using the i-PARIHS framework and personas.BMC nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExposure to hypotension is linked to increased morbidity and mortality. Invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurement might be superior to non-invasive blood pressure measurement in detecting hypotension. The feasibility of IBP in prehospital care for selected patients by specialized rescue teams has been demonstrated. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that the implementation of prehospital IBP measurement is feasible in a German emergency system by emergency teams with limited exposure to critically ill patients.
methodsThis single center study was conducted with two emergency physicians vehicles. Indications for IBP measurement were adults requiring airway management, catecholamine therapy or fluid resuscitation. IBP was performed using either direct or Seldinger technique. Physicians recorded the puncture attempts, cannulation sites, and techniques. Patients with IBP attempt were visited the first three days to report complications. Emergency physicians documented a reason if they decided not to perform IBP. Data were analyzed to find operational differences between IBP attempts and no IBP attempts and IBP success and failure. Multiple linear regression was used to measure the influence of prehospital IBP attempts on the on-scene time.
resultsDuring the study period, 3887 emergency responses occurred, with 2.8% (n = 108) meeting IBP criteria. Reasons for an IBP were catecholamine therapy (74%), airway management (73%) and fluid resuscitation (51%). 68 (63%) of the patients meeting IBP criteria received an IBP attempt with a success rate of 88%. While difficult extrication (p = 0.002) and longer transportation time (p = 0.009) were associated with a high IBP attempt rate, IBP attempts in nursing homes were less often performed (p = 0.002). Most common reason for not performing IBP was a transport priority and poor puncturing condition. Multiple regression analysis showed IBP attempts prolonged the on-scene time by 7.4 min (p = 0.013).
conclusionsPrehospital IBP can be performed safely even by teams with limited exposure to critically ill patients, with low failure and complication rates across a wide range of indications. Based on these data, IBP measurement prolonged the on-scene time by 7.5 min. Even though exposure to critically ill patients is rare, teams should consider performing an IBP if indicated.
trial registrationStudy was a part of the PHINIABP (PreHospital Invasive vs. Non-Invasive Blood Pressure) study and was registered with German Clinical Trials (ID DRKS00030477) and approved by the regional ethics committee (Ärztekammer Saarland, Saarbrücken, Germany, Identification Number 158/22, September 13, 2022). Written informed consent was obtained from patients or their legal representatives.
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.