Premium
Auscultate, palpate and tap: time to re‐evaluate
Author(s) -
Hawkes GA,
Hawkes CP,
Kenosi M,
Demeulemeester J,
Livingstone V,
Ryan CA,
Dempsey EM
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
acta paediatrica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.772
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1651-2227
pISSN - 0803-5253
DOI - 10.1111/apa.13169
Subject(s) - medicine , heart rate , anesthesia , blood pressure
Aim To determine the accuracy of current methods of heart rate ( HR ) assessment. Methods All participants palpated a simulated pulsating umbilicus ( UMB ), listened to a tapping rate ( TAP ) and auscultated a simulated HR ( AUSC ). A simulated HR of 54, 88 and 128 beats per minute (bpm) was randomised for all methods. Results Twenty‐nine healthcare staff participated in this study. Correct assessment of HR of 54 bpm as being within the 0‐59 range occurred in 17.2% UMB , 17.2% TAP and 31% AUSC and was obtained in <10 seconds by 48.3%, 65.5% and 62.1%, respectively. A rate of 88 bpm was correctly assessed as within the 60–100 range in 82.8% UMB , 79.3% TAP and 79.3% AUSC and was obtained in <10 seconds by 55.2%, 58.6% and 55.2%, respectively. A rate of 128 bpm was identified as >100 bpm by 96.6% UMB , 93.1% TAP , and 93.1% AUSC and was obtained in <10 seconds by 51.7%, 55.2% and 62.1%, respectively. Conclusion Current methods in assessing rates below 60 bpm are inaccurate and may overestimate HR . We recommend that these methods alone should not be relied upon in neonatal resuscitation and objective assessment of heart rate should be readily available at all newborn resuscitations.