Arch. Dis. Child

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
[Advanced]

The most recent version of this article was published on 1 November 2005

Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.. Published Online First: 29 April 2005. doi:10.1136/adc.2004.064717
Copyright © 2005 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
adc.2004.064717v1
90/6/F523    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in ADC Online
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tingay, D. G
Right arrow Articles by Morley, C. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tingay, D. G
Right arrow Articles by Morley, C. J

Original articles

End-tidal Carbon Dioxide and Transcutaneous Carbon Dioxide Monitoring During Neonatal Transport

David G Tingay 1*, Michael J Stewart 2 and Colin J Morley 3

1 Royal Children's Hospital, Australia
2 Newborn Emergency Transport Service (Victoria), Australia
3 Royal Women's Hospital, Australia

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: david.tingay{at}rch.org.au.

Accepted 22 April 2005


*   Abstract

Objective:To assess the accuracy of end-tidal carbon dioxide during neonatal transport compared with arterial and transcutaneous measurements.

Design:Paired end-tidal and transcutaneous carbon dioxide recordings were measured frequently during road transport of 21 ventilated neonates . The first paired carbon dioxide (CO2) values were compared with an arterial blood gas. The differences between arterial CO2 (PaCO2), transcutaneous CO2 (PtcCO2) and end-tidal CO2 (PetCO2) (P(a- Tc)CO2, P(a-Et) CO2 and P(Tc-Et) CO2) were analysed. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess bias and repeatability.

Results:PetCO2 correlated strongly with PaCO2 and PtcCO2. However PetCO2 underestimated PaCO2 at a clinically unacceptable level (mean - 1.1 kPa [SD 0.70]) and did not trend reliably over time within individual subjects. The PetCO2 bias was independent of the PaCO2 and severity of lung disease. Conclusions: End-tidal CO2 had an unacceptable underrecording bias. Transcutaneous CO2 should, currently, be considered the preferred method of non-invasive CO2 monitoring for neonatal transport.


Keywords: Carbon dioxide, infant, newborn, mechanical ventilation, patient monitoring, patient transport




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.Home page
E J Molloy and K Deakins
Are carbon dioxide detectors useful in neonates?
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed., July 1, 2006; 91(4): F295 - F298.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
ARCH DIS CHILD FETAL NEONATAL ED ED PRACTICE
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2005 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health