A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Error-checking intraoperative arterial line blood pressures. | LitMetric

Error-checking intraoperative arterial line blood pressures.

J Clin Monit Comput

Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave MC4028, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.

Published: June 2019

Electronic medical records now store a wealth of intraoperative hemodynamic data. However, analysis of such data is plagued by artifacts related to the monitoring environment. Here, we present an algorithm for automated identification of artifacts and replacement using interpolation of arterial line blood pressures. After IRB approval, minute-by-minute digital recordings of systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures (MAP) obtained during anesthesia care were analyzed using predetermined metrics to identify values anomalous from adjacent neighbors. Anomalous data points were then replaced with linear interpolation of neighbors. The algorithm was then validated against manual artifact identification in 54 anesthesia records and 41,384 arterial line measurements. To assess the algorithm's effect on data analysis, we calculated the percent of time spent with MAP below 55 mmHg and above 100 mmHg for both raw and conditioned datasets. Manual review of the dataset identified 1.23% of all pressure readings as artifactual. When compared to manual review, the algorithm identified artifacts with 87.0% sensitivity and 99.4% specificity. The average difference between manual review and algorithm in identifying the start of arterial line monitoring was 0.17, and 2.1 min for the end of monitoring. Application of the algorithm decreased the percent of time below 55 mmHg from 4.3 to 2.0% (2.1% with manual review) and time above 100 mmHg from 8.8 to 7.3% (7.3% manual). This algorithm's performance was comparable to manual review by a human anesthesiologist and reduced the incidence of abnormal MAP values identified using a sample analysis tool.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10877-018-0167-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

manual review
20
arterial blood
8
blood pressures
8
data analysis
8
percent time
8
review algorithm
8
manual
7
arterial
5
algorithm
5
review
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!