Dataset Information

Intracompartmental Pressure Monitoring Using a Handheld Pressure Monitoring System.

ABSTRACT: Introduction:We describe the correct technique for measuring compartment pressure with a handheld device to diagnose compartment syndrome. Step 1 Device Preparation:Proper preparation of the handheld pressure monitoring device (Stryker Surgical, Kalamazoo, Michigan) is critical to ensure that the device performs appropriately. Step 2 Identification of the Compartment of Interest:The needle must be placed in the proper location to appropriately measure a compartment's pressure. Step 3 Injection:Inject saline solution from the pressure monitoring device to clear any soft tissue from the side port on the needle that could result in inaccurate pressure measurements. Step 4 Stabilization and Pressure Reading:The pressure must reach a stable state before it is recorded; different pressure thresholds for decompression have been recommended in the literature. Step 5 Repeat Measurements:As mistakes can be made with any single measurement, accuracy may be improved by repeating steps 1 through 4 and averaging the results. Step 6 Additional Compartments:After the reading is obtained, move on to any additional compartment(s) that need to be evaluated, repeating the steps listed above. Results:The handheld intracompartmental monitoring device with a side-ported needle has been shown to be extremely accurate in the laboratory.IndicationsContraindicationsPitfalls & Challenges.

SUBMITTER: Halanski MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6221417 | biostudies-other | 2015 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intracompartmental Pressure Monitoring Using a Handheld Pressure Monitoring System.

Halanski Matthew A MA Morris Michael R MR Lee Harper Benjamin B Doro Christopher C

JBJS essential surgical techniques 20150201 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>We describe the correct technique for measuring compartment pressure with a handheld device to diagnose compartment syndrome.<h4>Step 1 device preparation</h4>Proper preparation of the handheld pressure monitoring device (Stryker Surgical, Kalamazoo, Michigan) is critical to ensure that the device performs appropriately.<h4>Step 2 identification of the compartment of interest</h4>The needle must be placed in the proper location to appropriately measure a compartment's pressu ...[more]

PMID: 30473914

Similar Datasets

Project description:The rapid detection and identification of infectious disease pathogens is a critical need for healthcare in both developed and developing countries. As we gain more insight into the genomic basis of pathogen infectivity and drug resistance, point-of-care nucleic acid testing will likely become an important tool for global health. In this paper, we present an inexpensive, handheld, battery-powered instrument designed to enable pathogen genotyping in the developing world. Our Microfluidic Biomolecular Amplification Reader (µBAR) represents the convergence of molecular biology, microfluidics, optics, and electronics technology. The µBAR is capable of carrying out isothermal nucleic acid amplification assays with real-time fluorescence readout at a fraction of the cost of conventional benchtop thermocyclers. Additionally, the µBAR features cell phone data connectivity and GPS sample geotagging which can enable epidemiological surveying and remote healthcare delivery. The µBAR controls assay temperature through an integrated resistive heater and monitors real-time fluorescence signals from 60 individual reaction chambers using LEDs and phototransistors. Assays are carried out on PDMS disposable microfluidic cartridges which require no external power for sample loading. We characterize the fluorescence detection limits, heater uniformity, and battery life of the instrument. As a proof-of-principle, we demonstrate the detection of the HIV-1 integrase gene with the µBAR using the Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) assay. Although we focus on the detection of purified DNA here, LAMP has previously been demonstrated with a range of clinical samples, and our eventual goal is to develop a microfluidic device which includes on-chip sample preparation from raw samples. The µBAR is based entirely around open source hardware and software, and in the accompanying online supplement we present a full set of schematics, bill of materials, PCB layouts, CAD drawings, and source code for the µBAR instrument with the goal of spurring further innovation toward low-cost genetic diagnostics.

Project description:BackgroundFetal stethoscopes are mainly used for intermittent monitoring of fetal heart rate (FHR) during labor in low-income countries, where perinatal mortality is still high. Handheld Dopplers are rarely available and are dependent on batteries or electricity. The objective was to compare the Pinard stethoscope versus a new wind-up handheld Doppler in the detection of abnormal FHR.Materials and methodsWe conducted a randomized controlled study at Muhimbili National Hospital, Tanzania, from April 2013 to September 2015. Women with gestational age ≥37 weeks, cephalic presentation, normal FHR on admission, and cervical dilatation <7 cm were included. Primary outcome was abnormal FHR detection (<120 or >160 beats/min). Secondary endpoints were time to delivery, mode of delivery, and perinatal outcomes. χ2, Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney test, and logistic regression were conducted. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios were calculated with respective 95% confidence interval.ResultsIn total, 2,844 eligible women were assigned to FHR monitoring with Pinard (n=1,423) or Doppler (n=1,421). Abnormal FHRs were more often detected in the Doppler (6.0%) versus the Pinard (3.9%) arm (adjusted odds ratio =1.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.13-2.26, p=0.008). Median (interquartile range) time from abnormal FHR detection to delivery was comparable between Doppler and Pinard, ie, 80 (60,161) and 89 (52,165) minutes, respectively, as was the incidence of cesarean delivery (12.0% versus 12.2%). The incidence of adverse perinatal outcomes (fresh stillbirths, 24-hour neonatal admissions, and deaths) was similar overall; however, among newborns with abnormal FHR delivered vaginally, adverse outcomes were less incident in Doppler (7 of 43 births, 16.3%) than in the Pinard arm (10 of 23 births, 43.5%), p=0.021.ConclusionIntermittent FHR monitoring using Doppler was associated with an increased detection of abnormal FHR compared to Pinard in a low-risk population. Time intervals from abnormal FHR detection to delivery were longer than recommended in both arms. Perinatal outcomes were better among vaginally delivered newborns with detected abnormal FHR in the Doppler arm.

Dataset Information

Intracompartmental Pressure Monitoring Using a Handheld Pressure Monitoring System.

Publications

Intracompartmental Pressure Monitoring Using a Handheld Pressure Monitoring System.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets