Login
Site Search
Subscribe
Modify
Home >
List Archives
Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign?
STEWART, Paul PStewart at ambulance.nsw.gov.auMon Apr 16 12:18:03 BST 2007
- Previous message: Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign?
- Next message: Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Did someone really analyze 10,825 patients to get to this earth shattering decision that " Heart rate alone is not sufficient to determine the need for emergent interventions for hemorrhage"? Paul Stewart Clinical Development Ambulance Service of New South Wales Mobile: 0422004101 pstewart at ambulance.nsw.gov.au ________________________________ From: S Schecter [https://internal.ambulance.nsw.gov.au/CitrixFEI/composemessage.asp?to=schecters@gmail.com] Sent: Mon 4/16/2007 11:14 AM To: Trauma &, Critical Care mailing list Subject: Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign? Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 62(4):812-817, April 2007. Brasel, Karen J. MD, MPH; Guse, Clare MS; Gentilello, Larry M. MD; Nirula, Ram MD, MPH Abstract: Background: Tachycardia, often defined as heart rate >100 bpm, has been utilized as a physical sign of hypovolemic shock among the injured for decades without evidence to support its use as a predictor of injury or significant hypovolemia. We sought to determine whether admission heart rate is a valid predictor of hemodynamically significant injuries. Methods: Trauma registry data from 1998 to 2004 were analyzed with logistic regression to determine whether heart rate was associated with need for emergent intervention for bleeding (laparotomy, thoracotomy, or angiography) , need for packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion in the first 24 hours, or severe injury (ISS >25) after blunt or penetrating trauma. Results: Records of 10,825 patients were analyzed. Overall, heart rate was neither sensitive nor specific in determining the need for emergent intervention, pRBCs in the first 24 hours or severe injury. This was not altered by the presence of hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) or age in the blunt cohort. Conclusions: Heart rate alone is not sufficient to determine the need for emergent interventions for hemorrhage. Although tachycardia may still indicate need for emergent intervention in the trauma patient, its absence should not allay such concern. JOIN THE MOST TRUSTED PROFESSION For more information visit Ambulance Recruitment at: www.ambulance.nsw.gov.au or call: (02) 9320 7827 --------------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: The information in this message is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose any details of this message to any other person or organisation. If you have received this message in error, please delete this copy. The Ambulance Service of New South Wales has enabled e-mail filtering and monitoring. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 6237 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.mistral.net/pipermail/trauma-list/attachments/20070416/88e5d3c9/attachment.bin
- Previous message: Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign?
- Next message: Heart Rate: Is It Truly a Vital Sign?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the trauma-list mailing list
