Background TEG6S ® and TEG5000 ® (Haemonetics Corp, USA) are haemostasis analysers that measure viscoelasticity properties of whole blood. Both use different mechanisms to assess similar components of the coagulation process. The aim of this study was to assess agreement and interchangeability between the TEG6S and TEG5000 analysers. Methods 3.5 mL whole blood was collected from 25 adult patients in a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU). Analysis was performed using TEG6S and TEG5000 haemostatic platforms. Agreement between platforms was measured using Lin’s concordance coefficient (Lin’s CC), further validated using intraclass correlation coefficients and reduced major axis regression (RMAR). Results Sixteen (64%) patients were male; mean (range) age: 59yo (23–86). TEG6S and TEG5000 systems were broadly interchangeable. The majority of TEG variables demonstrated almost perfect or substantial agreement and minimal proportional bias (maximum amplitude demonstrated a fixed bias). LY30%, however, demonstrated poor agreement and a proportional bias. Lin’s CC coefficients (95% CI, RMAR slope, intercept) between TEG6S and TEG5000 variables were: R time: 0.78 (0.64–0.92, 0.76, 0.92); K time: 0.82 (0.69–0.94, 1.30, − 0.93); alpha angle: 0.79 (0.64–0.95, 1.04, − 1.43); maximum amplitude (MA): 0.90 (0.83–0.96, 0.99, − 5.0); LY30%: 0.34 (0.1–0.58, 0.43, 0.04). Conclusions Adult patients with critical illness demonstrate almost perfect agreement in the R time and MA, substantial agreement in K time and alpha angle, but poor agreement in LY30%, as measured by the TEG6S and TEG5000 analysers. With the exception of LY30%, the TEG6S and TEG5000 platforms appear interchangeable. This has important implications for use in clinical practice and multi-site research programs. Trial registration ANZCRT number: 12617000062325 , registered 12/Jan17. Retrospectively registered. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-019-0717-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a common and debilitating complication of major surgery. We undertook a pilot study at three hospitals to assess the feasibility of a proposed large multicentre placebo-controlled randomised trial of intravenous perioperative ketamine to reduce the incidence of CPSP. Ketamine, 0.5 mg/kg pre-incision, 0.25 mg/kg/hour intraoperatively and 0.1 mg/kg/hour for 24 hours, or placebo, was administered to 80 patients, recruited over a 15-month period, undergoing abdominal or thoracic surgery under general anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was CPSP in the area of the surgery reported at six-month telephone follow-up using a structured questionnaire. Fourteen patients (17.5%) reported CPSP (relative risk [95% confidence interval] if received ketamine 1.18 [0.70 to 1.98], P=0.56). Four patients in the treatment group and three in the control group reported ongoing analgesic use to treat CPSP and two patients in each group reported their worst pain in the previous 24 hours at ≥3/10 at six months. There were no significant differences in adverse event rates, quality of recovery scores, or cumulative morphine equivalents consumption in the first 72 hours. Numeric Rating Scale pain scores (median [interquartile range]) for average pain in the previous 24 hours among those patients reporting CPSP were 17.5 [0 to 40] /100 with no difference between treatment groups. A large (n=4,000 to 5,000) adequately powered multicentre trial is feasible using this population and methodology.
Background Contemporary perioperative fasting guidelines aim to alleviate patient discomfort before surgery and enhance postoperative recovery whilst seeking to reduce the risk of pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia. The impact of a short message service (SMS) reminder on fasting guideline compliance is unknown. Therefore, we performed a retrospective observational study and quality improvement project aiming to quantify the extent of excessive and prolonged fasting, and then assessed the impact of a SMS reminder in reducing fasting times. Methods After ethics committee approval we performed a retrospective observational study investigating preoperative fasting times of adult patients undergoing elective surgery. First, we assessed whether the fasting guideline times were adhered to (Standard Care group). All patients received internationally recommended fasting guidelines in the form of a written hospital policy document. We then implemented an additional prompt via a mobile phone SMS 1 day prior to surgery containing a reminder of fasting guideline times (SMS group). The primary aims were to compare fasting times between the Standard Care group and the SMS group. Results The fasting times of 160 patients in the Standard Care group and 110 patients in the SMS group were evaluated. Adherence to the fasting guidelines for solids occurred in 14 patients (8.8%) in the Standard Care group vs. Twenty-two patients (13.6%) in the SMS group (p=0.01). Adherence to the fasting guidelines for fluids occurred in 4 patients (2.5%) in the Standard Care group vs. Ten patients (6.3%) in the SMS group (p=0.023). Patients in the Standard Care group had a longer median (inter-quartile range (IQR)) fasting time for fluids compared the SMS group [6.5 h (IQR 4.5:11) vs 3.5 h (IQR 3:8.5), p< 0.0001]. Median fasting times for solids were 11 h (IQR 7:14) in the Standard Care group and 11.5 h (IQR 7:13.5) in the SMS group (p=0.756). Conclusion Adherence to internationally recommended fasting guidelines for patients undergoing elective surgery is poor. The introduction of a fasting guideline reminder via a mobile phone SMS in addition to a written hospital policy improved adherence to fasting advice and reduced the fasting times for fluids but not for solids. The use of an SMS reminder of fasting guidelines is a simple, feasible, low-cost, and effective tool in minimising excessive fasting for fluids among elective surgical patients. Trial registration ACTRN12619001232123 (Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry). Registered 6th September 2019 (retrospectively registered).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.