Comparison of pocket pulse oximeter and standard pulse oximeter with ABG analysis in critically ill patients

Background: Pulse oximetry (SpO2) is a standard monitoring device in patients presenting to EMDs and intensive care units (ICUs). Pocket pulse oximeters (PPOs) are used widely in wards, EMDs, and small hospitals/clinics. These inexpensive PPOs also guide therapeutic interventions. Few studies have evaluated the accuracy of SpO2 in patients presenting to critical care areas vis-à-vis devices like PPO and standard pulse oximeter (SPO). This study becomes extremely relevant in view of the ongoing crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic wherein SpO2 monitoring is very important in hospitals, quarantine centers, small clinics, or even at home.Methods: Patients presenting to critical areas who underwent arterial blood gases (ABG) analysis on the recommendation of the treating physician between November 2016 and October 2018 were included in this study. Along with the ABG analysis, a simultaneous assessment of SpO2 was done with a single PPO and SPO and all values were noted. Statistical analysis was done using the SPSS v.21.0 for Windows.Results: The study included 300 patients. We compared the O2 saturations of ABG, SPO, and PPO with respect to sex, different age groups, and at different levels of ABG pCO2, HCO3, and pH in all patients. All parameters were compared using the Pearson’s correlation test; the results showed that ABG O2 saturations were closer to the SPO than the PPO but the differences were not statistically significant as the Pearson’s correlation values for all parameters were >0.8. We also compared the parameters by Bland Altman Plot and all observations were outside 95% CI (confidence interval), which means that there was a good agreement between O2 saturations by all three methods, that is, ABG, SPO, and PPO; however, ABG O2 saturations were closer to SPO than PPO but this difference was not statistically significant. Hence, we conclude that the PPO is a useful tool for reliable monitoring of O2 saturations.Conclusion: This study highlights that inexpensive and noninvasive PPO can be used as a standard monitoring device with reliability in critically ill patients presenting to EMDs, ICUs, and small hospitals/clinics, quarantine centers, and even at home

Comparison of Pocket Pulse Oximeter and Standard Pulse Oximeter With ABG Analysis in Critically Ill Patients

Background: Pulse oximetry (SpO2) is a standard monitoring device in patients presenting to EMDs and intensive care units (ICUs). Pocket pulse oximeters (PPOs) are used widely in wards, EMDs, and small hospitals/clinics. These inexpensive PPOs also guide therapeutic interventions. Few studies have evaluated the accuracy of SpO2 in patients presenting to critical care areas vis-à-vis devices like PPO and standard pulse oximeter (SPO). This study becomes extremely relevant in view of the ongoing crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic wherein SpO2 monitoring is very important in hospitals, quarantine centers, small clinics, or even at home.  Methods: Patients presenting to critical areas who underwent arterial blood gases (ABG) analysis on the recommendation of the treating physician between November 2016 and October 2018 were included in this study. Along with the ABG analysis, a simultaneous assessment of SpO2 was done with a single PPO and SPO and all values were noted. Statistical analysis was done using the SPSS v.21.0 for Windows.  Results: The study included 300 patients. We compared the O2 saturations of ABG, SPO, and PPO with respect to sex, different age groups, and at different levels of ABG pCO2, HCO3, and pH in all patients. All parameters were compared using the Pearson’s correlation test; the results showed that ABG O2 saturations were closer to the SPO than the PPO but the differences were not statistically significant as the Pearson’s correlation values for all parameters were >0.8. We also compared the parameters by Bland Altman Plot and all observations were outside 95% CI (confidence interval), which means that there was a good agreement between O2 saturations by all three methods, that is, ABG, SPO, and PPO; however, ABG O2 saturations were closer to SPO than PPO but this difference was not statistically significant. Hence, we conclude that the PPO is a useful tool for reliable monitoring of O2 saturations.  Conclusion: This study highlights that inexpensive and noninvasive PPO can be used as a standard monitoring device with reliability in critically ill patients presenting to EMDs, ICUs, and small hospitals/clinics, quarantine centers, and even at home

Cause of Death and Predictors of All-Cause Mortality in Anticoagulated Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation : Data From ROCKET AF

M. Kaste on työryhmän ROCKET AF Steering Comm jäsen.Background-Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intention-to-treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS(2) score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan-Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33-1.70, P= 75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51-1.90, P Conclusions-In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, approximate to 7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereasPeer reviewe

Cause of death and predictors of all-cause mortality in anticoagulated patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: Data from ROCKET AF

Background-Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intentionto- treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS2 score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan-Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33-1.70, P<0.0001) and age 6575 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51-1.90, P<0.0001) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Multiple additional characteristics were independently associated with higher mortality, with decreasing creatinine clearance, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, male sex, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes being among the most strongly associated (model C-index 0.677). Conclusions-In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, 487 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereas <1 in 10 deaths were caused by nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. Optimal prevention and treatment of heart failure, renal impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes may improve survival

Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonists are highly effective in preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but have several limitations. Apixaban is a novel oral direct factor Xa inhibitor that has been shown to reduce the risk of stroke in a similar population in comparison with aspirin. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared apixaban (at a dose of 5 mg twice daily) with warfarin (target international normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0) in 18,201 patients with atrial fibrillation and at least one additional risk factor for stroke. The primary outcome was ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The trial was designed to test for noninferiority, with key secondary objectives of testing for superiority with respect to the primary outcome and to the rates of major bleeding and death from any cause. RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 1.8 years. The rate of the primary outcome was 1.27% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 1.60% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.01 for superiority). The rate of major bleeding was 2.13% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.80; P<0.001), and the rates of death from any cause were 3.52% and 3.94%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.99; P = 0.047). The rate of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.24% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 0.47% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.75; P<0.001), and the rate of ischemic or uncertain type of stroke was 0.97% per year in the apixaban group and 1.05% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.13; P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atrial fibrillation, apixaban was superior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism, caused less bleeding, and resulted in lower mortality. Copyright © 2011 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved

Apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack: A subgroup analysis of the ARISTOTLE trial

Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18 201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4-2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984. Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI -0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (-0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09-2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54-1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA. Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd