Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Man versus machine: comparison of naked-eye estimation and quantified capillary refill
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Drug Research. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Local Health Care Services in Central Östergötland, Department of Emergency Medicine.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Drug Research. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Local Health Care Services in Central Östergötland, Department of Emergency Medicine.
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Division of Cell Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Heart and Medicine Center, Department of Dermatology and Venerology.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Drug Research. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Local Health Care Services in Central Östergötland, Department of Emergency Medicine.
2019 (English)In: Emergency Medicine Journal, ISSN 1472-0205, E-ISSN 1472-0213, Vol. 36, no 8, p. 465-471Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background Capillary refill (CR) time is traditionally assessed by naked-eye inspection of the return to original colour of a tissue after blanching pressure. Few studies have addressed intra-observer reliability or used objective quantification techniques to assess time to original colour. This study compares naked-eye assessment with quantified CR (qCR) time using polarisation spectroscopy and examines intra-observer and interobserver agreements in using the naked eye. Method A film of 18 CR tests (shown in a random fixed order) performed in healthy adults was assessed by a convenience sample of 14 doctors, 15 nurses and 19 secretaries (Department of Emergency Medicine, Linkoping University, September to November 2017), who were asked to estimate the time to return to colour and characterise it as fast, normal or slow. The qCR times and corresponding naked-eye time assessments were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Three videos were shown twice without observers knowledge to measure intra-observer repeatability. Intra-observer categorical assessments were compared using Cohens Kappa analysis. Interobserver repeatability was measured and depicted with multiple-observer Bland-Altman plotting. Differences in naked-eye estimation between professions were analysed using ANOVA. Results Naked-eye assessed CR time and qCR time differ substantially, and agreement for the categorical assessments (naked-eye assessment vs qCR classification) was poor (Cohens kappa 0.27). Bland-Altman intra-observer repeatability ranged from 6% to 60%. Interobserver agreement was low as shown by the Bland-Altman plotting with a 95% limit of agreement with the mean of +/- 1.98 s for doctors, +/- 1.6 s for nurses and +/- 1.75 s for secretaries. The difference in CR time estimation (in seconds) between professions was not significant. Conclusions Our study suggests that naked-eye-assessed CR time shows poor reproducibility, even by the same observers, and differs from an objective measure of CR time.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP , 2019. Vol. 36, no 8, p. 465-471
National Category
Anesthesiology and Intensive Care
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-159714DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2018-207948ISI: 000478913300006PubMedID: 31308133OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-159714DiVA, id: diva2:1343889
Note

Funding Agencies|Region Ostergotland [LIO-532001, LIO-700271]

Available from: 2019-08-19 Created: 2019-08-19 Last updated: 2019-09-11

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(678 kB)37 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 678 kBChecksum SHA-512
e69e8dec3b693c317e1259be633be35fa1b1a3624d461b2f1b69fcd99dad2ee69229bb414c062690c5a8c719a991301f28e8bde2b3bf9a91619f8a787b4f6dd3
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Toll, RaniHenricson, JoakimAnderson, ChrisWilhelms, Daniel
By organisation
Division of Drug ResearchFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesDepartment of Emergency MedicineDivision of Cell BiologyDepartment of Dermatology and Venerology
In the same journal
Emergency Medicine Journal
Anesthesiology and Intensive Care

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 37 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 72 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf