Superiority of compensatory reserve measurement compared with the Shock index for early and accurate detection of reduced central blood volume status

Abstract

BACKGROUND Shock index (SI) equals the ratio of heart rate (HR) to systolic blood pressure (SBP) with clinical evidence that it is more sensitive for trauma patient status assessment and prediction of outcome compared with either HR or SBP alone. We used lower body negative pressure (LBNP) as a human model of central hypovolemia and compensatory reserve measurement (CRM) validated for accurate tracking of reduced central blood volume to test the hypotheses that SI: (1) presents a late signal of central blood volume status; (2) displays poor sensitivity and specificity for predicting the onset of hemodynamic decompensation; and (3) cannot identify individuals at greatest risk for the onset of circulatory shock. METHODS We measured HR, SBP, and CRM in 172 human subjects (19–55 years) during progressive LBNP designed to determine tolerance to central hypovolemia as a model of hemorrhage. Subjects were subsequently divided into those with high tolerance (HT) (n = 118) and low tolerance (LT) (n = 54) based on completion of 60 mm Hg LBNP. The time course relationship between SI and CRM was determined and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for sensitivity and specificity of CRM and SI to predict hemodynamic decompensation using clinically defined thresholds of 40% for CRM and 0.9 for SI. RESULTS The time and level of LBNP required to reach a SI = 0.9 (~60 mm Hg LBNP) was significantly greater (p < 0.001) compared with CRM that reached 40% at ~40 mm Hg LBNP. Shock index did not differ between HT and LT subjects at 45 mm Hg LBNP levels. ROC AUC for CRM was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.94–0.97) compared with 0.91 (0.89–0.94) for SI (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSION Despite high sensitivity and specificity, SI delays time to detect reductions in central blood volume with failure to distinguish individuals with varying tolerances to central hypovolemia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level III.

Physiologic validation of the Compensatory Reserve Metric obtained from pulse oximetry: A step toward advanced medical monitoring on the battlefield

“…Future investigation should aim to perform in-field validation of the CRM relative to physiologic parameters and the shock index. 20…”

“…Parameter thresholds for shock determination are provided. 19,20 Data are also presented for the median LBNP stage where the shock threshold was reached with the number of participants that reached the threshold.…”