CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
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 Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duncan, P. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duncan, P. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. M.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 38, 619-625, Copyright © 1991 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Pulse oximetry and capnography in anaesthetic practice: an epidemiological appraisal

PG Duncan and MM Cohen
Department of Anaesthesia, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon.

In the evaluation of any medical technology the efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency must each be considered before routine deployment is recommended. Since the widespread practice of patient monitoring by pulse oximetry and capnography has occurred before the performance of rigorously controlled trials, definitive proof of worth is lacking. The purpose of this review is to appraise critically the effectiveness of this technology. The assessment was performed using concepts developed in epidemiology and community medicine to establish a given factor to be causative to a given outcome. The current literature pertaining to anaesthetic adverse outcomes was reviewed, and the use of monitors evaluated against the criteria of a causal relationship. While the conclusions are based more on the absence of positive data (owing to low frequency of adverse anaesthetic occurrences) rather than negative results, it must be concluded that the effectiveness of such monitoring has yet to be demonstrated. Such a conclusion should not detract from their use, for the role of an individual factor in the complex chain of accident evolution will seldom be demonstrable. Rather, such an appraisal should encourage a clear perspective of the depth of our clinical science, and encourage more rigorous critical evaluation in the future.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. M. Sanderson, M. O. Watson, and W. J. Russell
Advanced Patient Monitoring Displays: Tools for Continuous Informing
Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2005; 101(1): 161 - 168.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PerfusionHome page
E. A Hessel II
Review article : What's new in monitoring the coronary surgery patient?
Perfusion, July 1, 1992; 7(3): 161 - 194.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.