Table 1 Evaluation studies on the accuracy of thoracic electrical bioimpedance devices
From: Non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring in trauma patients
Author, year | Study design | Device | Patients | Correlation coefficient r | r 2 | Bias and precision (l/min/m 2 ) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bishop et al. 1996 [15] | Prospective | Renaissance Technologies | 54 patients with gunshot wounds | 0.79 | 0.62 | −0.011 |
Shoemaker et al. 1998 [11] | Retrospective | Renaissance Technologies | 268 (139 trauma patients) | 0.83 | 0.68 | −0.058 +/- 0.78 |
Velmahos et al. 1999 [2] | Prospective | Renaissance Technologies | 38 severely traumatized patients | 0.91 | 0.83 | - |
Velmahos et al. 1999 [3] | Prospective | Renaissance Technologies | 134 blunt trauma patients | 0.83 | 0.69 | −0.02 +/- 0.78 |
Shoemaker et al. 2001 [6] | Prospective | IQ System; Wantagh Inc. | 151 trauma patients | 0.91 | 0.83 | −0.3 +/- 1.1 |
Brown et al. 2005 [13] | Retrospective | IQ System; Wantagh Inc. | 285 critically injured patients | 0.84 | 0.71 | −0.14 +/-0.73 |
Shoemaker et al. 2006 [5] | Prospective | IQ Model 101; Noninvasive Medical Technologies LLC or PhysioFlow; VasoCOM | 267 trauma patients | 0.92 | 0.84 | −0.07 +/- 0.47 |