Accuracy of radial pulse assessment by length of counting interval.
Accuracy of radial pulse assessment by length of counting interval.
复制标题
通过计数间隔长度评估桡动脉脉搏的准确性。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1990
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
N. Sneed
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Hollerbach;N. Sneed
本研究的目的是确定在15秒，30秒和60秒的间隔计数静息和快速桡动脉脉搏率的可靠性和有效性。计算103名护士受试者获得的心率与在静息心率和快速心率下三个计数间期同时进行的心电图描记获得的心率之间的差异评分。重复测量方差分析表明，受试者的教育水平没有差异。总体而言，快速心率（大于或等于100次/分钟）的准确性显著低于静息心率（p = 0.0076）。尽管计数间隔长度存在显著的主效应（p = 0.0490），但Tukey HSD检验的事后评价显示，仅15秒快速计数与所有静息计数存在显著差异，但与30秒或60秒快速计数无差异。这些结果表明，30秒的计数间隔可能是最准确和有效的计数桡动脉脉搏和15秒的计数间隔不应用于速度快于100次/分钟。
The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of counting resting and rapid radial pulse rates at 15-, 30-, and 60-second intervals. Difference scores were calculated between heart rates obtained by the 103 nurse subjects and rates obtained from simultaneous electrocardiographic tracings taken for the three counting intervals at resting rates and at rapid rates. Repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated no differences based on the subjects' educational level. Rapid heart rates (greater than or equal to 100 beats/min), as a whole, were significantly less accurate than resting rates (p = 0.0076). Although there was a significant main effect for length of counting interval (p = 0.0490), post hoc evaluation by Tukey's HSD test showed that only the 15-second rapid counts were significantly different from all the resting counts, but they were not different from the 30- or 60-second rapid counts. These results suggest that a 30-second counting interval may be the most accurate and efficient to use in counting the radial pulse and that the 15-second counting interval should not be used for rates faster than 100 beats/min.