Accuracy and precision of transcutaneous carbon dioxide monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
clinical epidemiology
respiratory measurement
Journal
Thorax
ISSN: 1468-3296
Titre abrégé: Thorax
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0417353
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
received:
23
12
2017
revised:
31
05
2018
accepted:
13
08
2018
pubmed:
14
9
2018
medline:
7
5
2019
entrez:
14
9
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Transcutaneous carbon dioxide (TcCO Medline and EMBASE (2000-2016) were searched for studies that reported on a measurement of PaCO The mean bias was -0.1 mm Hg and the population limits of agreement were -15 to 15 mm Hg for 7021 paired measurements taken from 2817 participants in 73 studies, which was outside of the clinically acceptable range (7.5 mm Hg). The lowest PaCO There are substantial differences between TcCO PROSPERO; CRD42017057450.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Transcutaneous carbon dioxide (TcCO
METHODS
Medline and EMBASE (2000-2016) were searched for studies that reported on a measurement of PaCO
RESULTS
The mean bias was -0.1 mm Hg and the population limits of agreement were -15 to 15 mm Hg for 7021 paired measurements taken from 2817 participants in 73 studies, which was outside of the clinically acceptable range (7.5 mm Hg). The lowest PaCO
CONCLUSION
There are substantial differences between TcCO
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO; CRD42017057450.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30209079
pii: thoraxjnl-2017-211466
doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-211466
doi:
Substances chimiques
Carbon Dioxide
142M471B3J
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
157-163Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.