Cardiothoracic & vascular anesthesia
Comparison of the ClearSight™ finger cuff monitor versus invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients: a prospective observational study
Authors' conclusion
In this prospective observational study, we did not find the ClearSight system to be an acceptable substitute for invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients according to AAMI guidelines.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery
- Participants
- 30 patients
- Exposure
- ClearSight finger cuff vs invasive arterial BP measurement
- Outcome
- Agreement of ClearSight with invasive arterial BP (AAMI recommendations: fixed bias, percentage error, interchangeability)
- Follow-up
- Intraoperatively
Methodological detailsmethod-comparison, Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) agreement criteria
- Method-comparison
- AAMI agreement criteria
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Agreement ClearSight vs arterial line
Mean difference
8.7
P < 0.001
Systolic blood pressure (SBP); fixed bias
Mean difference
−2.2
P < 0.001
Diastolic blood pressure (DBP); fixed bias
Mean difference
−0.5
P < 0.001
Mean arterial pressure (MAP); no fixed bias
- Average interchangeability rate, SBP
- 38%
- Average interchangeability rate, DBP
- 50%
- Average interchangeability rate, MAP
- 50%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Time to place monitor · significantly faster; paired samples t test
P < 0.001
Original publication
Comparison of the ClearSight™ finger cuff monitor versus invasive arterial blood pressure measurement in elective cardiac surgery patients: a prospective observational study. Can J Anaesth. Published 24 September 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →