Skip to main content

Table 2 Bland-Altman’s analysis of the agreement of hemodynamic measurements at each study moment

From: Comparison between pressure-recording analytical method (PRAM) and femoral arterial thermodilution method (FATD) cardiac output monitoring in an infant animal model of cardiac arrest

FATD-PRAM

N

Bias

95 % CI

LoA high (%)

LoA low (%)

SVI baseline (mL/m2)

24

−6.8

−12.4 to −1.2

20.8 (70.7)

−34.4 (−111)

SVI ROSC15’ (mL/m2)

11

4.7

−0.2 to 9.5

20.8 (80.9)

−11.3 (−52.1)

SVI ROSC30’ (mL/m2)

11

5.9

1.6 to 10.2

20.2 (69.9)

−8.5 (−30.9)

SVI ROSC60’ (mL/m2)

12

−0.2

−7.39 to 6.9

24.6 (92.3)

−25.0 (−97.7)

SVRI baseline (dyn*s*cm−5*m−2)

24

163

−132 to 459

1610 (86.0)

−1283 (−77.6)

SVRI ROSC15’ (dyn*s*cm−5*m−2)

11

−919

−1880 to 41

2266 (148)

−4104 (−315)

SVRI ROSC30’ (dyn*s*cm−5*m−2)

11

−565

−912 to −220

582 (62.7)

−1714 (−178)

SVRI ROSC60’ (dyn*s*cm−5*m−2)

12

−310

−633 to 13

808 (70.1)

−1428 (−137)

SVV baseline (%)

24

3.8

0.9 to 6.6

17.6 (104)

−10.1 (−62)

SVV ROSC15’ (%)

11

2.8

−5.8 to 11.4

31.3 (250)

−25.7 (−289)

SVV ROSC30’ (%)

11

−2.2

−10.1 to 5.7

24.0 (109)

−28.3 (−143)

SVV ROSC60’ (%)

12

2.0

−2.3 to 6.3

16.9 (93.5)

−12.9 (−68)

  1. FATD femoral arterial thermodilution, PRAM pressure recording analytical method, N sample size, Bias mean of the differences, 95 % CI 95 % confidence interval of the Bias, LoA (%) limit of agreement expressed as absolute value and as the percentage of the reference method (FATD), SVI stroke volume index, ROSC recovery of spontaneous circulation, SVRI systemic vascular resistance index, SVV stroke volume variation