MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971244132 · doi:10.14740/jocmr1997w

Implementation of Continuous Capnography Is Associated With a Decreased Utilization of Blood Gases

2014· article· en· W1971244132 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Courtney M. Rowan, Richard Speicher, Terri Hedlund, Sheikh Sohail Ahmed, Nancy L. Swigonski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapnographyMedicineAnesthesiaArterial bloodVentilation (architecture)Emergency medicineBlood gas analysisMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Capnography provides a continuous, non-invasive monitoring of the CO2 to assess adequacy of ventilation and provide added safety features in mechanically ventilated patients by allowing for quick identification of unplanned extubation. These monitors may allow for decreased utilization of blood gases. The objective was to determine if implementation of continuous capnography monitoring decreases the utilization of blood gases resulting in decreased charges. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a quality improvement project that compares the utilization of blood gases before and after the implementation of standard continuous capnography. The time period of April 2010 to September 2010 was compared to April 2011 to September 2011. Parameters collected included total number of blood gases analyzed, cost of blood gas analysis, ventilator and patient days. RESULTS: The total number of blood gases after the institution of end tidal CO2 monitoring decreased from 12,937 in 2009 and 13,171 in 2010 to 8,070 in 2011. The average number of blood gases per encounter decreased from 20.8 in 2009 and 21.6 in 2010 to 13.8 post intervention. The blood gases per ventilator day decreased from 4.94 in 2009 and 4.76 in 2010 to 3.30 post intervention. The total charge savings over a 6-month period was $880,496. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous capnography resulted in a significant savings over a 6-month period by decreasing the utilization of blood gas measurements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.247
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207