• J Y Min, H I Kim, S J Park, H Lim, J H Song, and H J Byon.
• Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Severance Hospital, Anesthesia and Pain Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, Republic of Korea.
• BMC Anesthesiol. 2017 Aug 22; 17 (1): 110.

BackgroundIn the perioperative period, it may be inappropriate to monitor vital signs during endotracheal intubation using the same interval as during a hemodynamically stable period. The aim of the present study was to determine whether it is appropriate to use the same intervals used during the endotracheal intubation and stable periods to monitor vital signs of patients under general anesthesia.MethodsThe mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were continuously measured during endotracheal intubation (15 min after intubation) and hemodynamically stable (15 min before skin incision) periods in 24 general anesthesia patients. Data was considered "unrecognized" when continuously measured values were 30% more or less than the monitored value measured at 5- or 2.5-min intervals. The incidence of unrecognized data during endotracheal intubation was compared to that during the hemodynamically stable period.ResultThere were significantly more unrecognized MAP data measured at 5-min intervals during endotracheal intubation than during the hemodynamically stable period (p value <0.05). However, there was no difference in the incidence of unrecognized MAP data at 2.5 min intervals or HR data at 5 or 2.5 min intervals between during the endotracheal intubation and hemodynamically stable periods.ConclusionA 5-min interval throughout the operation period was not appropriate for monitoring vital signs. Therefore, , a 2.5-min interval is recommended for monitoring the MAP during endotracheal intubation.

20 keywords...

hide…