Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT02399488
NCT02399488
Unknown
Not Applicable

Validation of a Continuous Noninvasive Haemoglobin Determination Monitor (Radical 7 Pulse CO-Oximeter, SpHb) Compared to the Central Laboratory Coulter (LabHb) and a Point of Care (POC) Invasive Cooximeter (COoxHb) After in Vivo Adjustment.

Hospital Universitario Doctor Peset1 site in 1 country60 target enrollmentFebruary 2012

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Sphb Haemoglobin in Vivo Validation
Sponsor
Hospital Universitario Doctor Peset
Enrollment
60
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Central coulter bias and limits of agreement after in vivo calibration
Last Updated
10 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

Continuous haemoglobin determination could improve the outcomes of several patients in risk of bleeding during surgery. An in vivo calibration has been introduced to the device after our team found its need. The uncalilbrated validation of the Masimo Radical 7 continuous haemoglobin monitor has been made in various papers, although it has been compared to point of care devices, thus introducing an error as such point of care devices although validated for haemoglobin determination, are not as accurate as the gold standard. The validation of the gold standard calibrated device has not been described yet.

When compared to the accepted gold standard (cyanmethemoglobin method, Coulter), accuracy and precision of the continuous haemoglobin monitor could be good enough to be used interchangeably with the gold standard.

Detailed Description

Continuous haemoglobin determination could improve the outcomes of several patients in risk of bleeding during surgery. The in vivo calibration has not been adjusted to the gold standard haemoglobin determination in the literature yet. Two blood samples will be withdrawn at the same time from an arterial line, one for the central laboratory and the other one for the POC device. At the same exact time the SpHb measurement will be recorded. At least eight samples are expected per patient. A maximum of 20 samples will be withdrawn per patient. To compare bias, precision and limits of agreement among SpHb, LabHb and COoxHb the Bland Altman method will be used with multiple observations per subject when the true value varies. An error grid analysis will be made to know how it could affect to clinical decision making.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
February 2012
End Date
September 2015
Last Updated
10 years ago
Study Type
Observational
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Juan Soliveres

MD, PhD

Hospital Universitario Doctor Peset

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Adult patients.
  • Surgery duration of at least two hours.
  • Patients scheduled to surgery under general anaesthesia and muscle relaxation.
  • Radial arterial line needed for blood pressure control or other reason not related to the study.

Exclusion Criteria

  • Radial arterial line not indicated / not possible to place.
  • Sampling difficult or impossible.
  • Need to reposition arterial line arm during surgery.
  • Any illness that could influence the haemoglobin measurement.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Central coulter bias and limits of agreement after in vivo calibration

Time Frame: 3 months

Bias and limits of agreement of SpHb compared to the central laboratory coulter after in vivo Radical 7 calibration

Central coulter bias and limits of agreement

Time Frame: 3 months

Bias and limits of agreement of SpHb compared to the central laboratory coulter

Secondary Outcomes

  • POC Cooximeter bias and limits of agreement(3 months)
  • POC Cooximeter Coulter interchangeability(3 months)

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials