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
Background: Acceleromyometry is the clinical standard for quantitative neuromuscular monitoring, mostly using the stimulation pattern train-of-four (TOF). TOF-Cuff®, a recently introduced neuromuscular monitor with stimulating electrodes integrated within a blood pressure cuff, assesses the muscular response in the upper arm.
Methods: The time from administration of a neuromuscular blocking agent to TOF-ratio 0% during modified rapid sequence induction was compared between TOF-Cuff® and acceleromyometry (TOF-Scan®). Included were 26 adults with body mass index <35 kg/m. TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff® were simultaneously fitted on patients' opposite arms. The mean difference to TOF-ratio 0% was compared using the one sample t-test (p < 0.05) and Bland-Altman plots.
Results: After anesthesia induction, atracurium 0.9 mg/kg (±0.08) i.v. was administered. The mean time to TOF ratio 0% for TOF-Scan® was 140.4 s (±34.3), and 132.7 s (±32.5) for TOF-Cuff®, with a mean difference of 5.4 (95% CI: -9.9 to 20.7, p = 0.472). The maximum difference between the two modalities was 135 s when the TOF-Cuff® was faster and 60 s when the TOF-Scan® was faster.
Conclusions: No statistically significant systematic difference was found between TOF-Scan® and TOF-Cuff®. However, there was high variability and wide limits of agreement. The two devices cannot be used interchangeably.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.auec.2020.02.005 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!