Accuracy of Pulse Rates Counted for Fifteen, Thirty and Sixty Seconds

Jones, Mary Lou Helfrich

doi:10.1093/milmed/135.12.1127

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study found a difference of 6 beats per minute between sleeping and waking states of the infants. Another study found that there was no advantage in using the longer 60 s over the 15‐ or 30‐s count periods 41 . This study suggested the greatest variation in the pulse rates counted by nurses occurred with a 60‐s count, and that the 15‐s count period resulted in the least difference.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 70%

Vital signs

Lockwood¹,

Conroy²,

Page³

2004

JBI Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive summary Background Vital signs traditionally consist of blood pressure, temperature, pulse rate and respiratory rate, and are an important component of monitoring the patient’s progress during hospitalisation. An initial search of the literature indicated that there was a vast volume of published information relating to this topic; however, there had been no previous attempt to systematically review this literature. This review was therefore initiated to identify, appraise and summarise the best available evidence relating to the measurement of vital signs in hospital patients. Objectives The objectives of this review were to present the best available information related to the monitoring of patient vital signs with regard to their purpose, limitations, optimal frequency of measurements, and what measures should constitute vital signs. The review also sought to identify additional issues of importance related to the individual parameters of temperature measurement, blood pressure assessment, pulse rate measurement and respiratory rate measurement. Review methods This review considered all studies that related to the objectives and included neonatal, paediatric and/or adult hospital patients. The outcome measures of interest were those related to the accuracy of, required frequency of or the need for vital signs. The review also considered any study addressing some aspect of vital signs measurement to ensure all issues of importance were identified. The search sought to find both published and unpublished studies. Databases searched included CINAHL, Medline, Current Contents, Cochrane Library, Embase and Dissertation Abstracts. The references of all identified studies were examined for additional references. All studies were checked for methodological quality, and data was extracted using a data extraction tool. Results Although a variety of measures may be useful additions to the traditional four vital sign parameters, only pulse oximetry and smoking status have been shown to change patient care and outcomes. There are suggestions that vital sign monitoring has become a routine procedure, but little useful information was identified in regard to the optimal frequency of vital sign measurement. It was noted that many of the important issues related to vital sign measurement have not been investigated through research. There is currently only limited research related to respiratory rate as a vital sign; however, its value as an indicator of serious illness has not been reliably established. There is only limited research relating to pulse rate measurements. Although routinely used for all hospital patients, the ability to detect serious physiological changes by assessment of pulse rate has not been rigorously evaluated. Many factors were identified that could potentially influence the accuracy of blood pressure measurement. Auscultation is accurate for the measurement of systolic blood pressure using phase I Korotkoff sound as the reference point, and for diastolic pressure if phase V Korotkoff sound...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 70%

Vital signs

Lockwood¹,

Conroy²,

Page³

2004

JBI Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A representative study by Jones (1970) quantified the errors of pulse-counting at 15, 30 and 60 s. In that study, 58 nurses and 30 nursing students counted human pulse rates by radial palpation, which were then compared with the rates simultaneously obtained using electrocardiography. The error was defined as the absolute difference between the two pulse rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of measurement duration on accuracy of pulse-counting

Kobayashi

2013

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, the relation between the measurement duration and accuracy of pulse-counting was quantitatively examined with special reference to low-frequency fluctuations in heart rate variability. The interbeat intervals of 70 healthy male subjects were measured in standing, sitting and supine positions. Pulse rates for various durations were calculated by objective-scoring simulation based on the heartbeat recordings of the subjects. The duration of pulse-counting continuously varied from 6 to 60 s in the simulation. Simulated pulse rates were compared with the rate calculated from the 60 s that includes the given duration, and the absolute difference between the two rates was defined as the error. Average errors of pulse-counting for 15 s were 1.89, 1.89 and 1.80 bpm for standing, sitting and supine positions, respectively. No difference in error was observed between standing and sitting positions; however, smaller errors were observed in the supine position.Practitioner Summary: This study provides information on the degree of error that will occur when pulse rates are objectively scored for various durations, for example 10, 15 or 30 s, instead of a full minute. This useful information may be beneficial for physicians, nurses and medical practitioners.

show abstract

“…Pulse rate can manifest one’s physiological and psychological state; moreover, it is one way of evaluating the effectiveness of nursing care. Nevertheless, many studies ( Jones, 1970; Hollerbach & Sneed, 1990; Margolius et al 1991 ) have a consistent conclusion: the accuracy of measuring pulse rate needs to be reassessed.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of the effectiveness of different measuring times and counting methods of human radial pulse rates

Hwu

Coates²,

Lin

2000

Journal of Clinical Nursing

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of measuring resting radial pulse rates by the use of three measuring times: 15, 30 and 60 s; and two counting methods: one beginning with zero (0) and the other with one (1). A two-factor within-subjects experimental design was used to determine the mean difference between pulse rates obtained from the radial artery, and the heart rates recorded by simultaneous electrocardiographic (ECG) recordings. The sample comprised 206 students. Mean difference was used to calculate the extent of any differences between radial pulse rates and the rate shown by the ECG. The interaction between measuring time and counting methods was confirmed using a two-factor within-subjects analysis of variance. For all types of measuring time, the counting from zero method produced a greater mean difference than the counting from one method. For all measuring times, the mean difference between radial pulse rates and rates shown by the ECG were non-significant in the counting from one method. In other words, when the pulse rate is counted from one, the rates obtained at 15 or 30 s could be used to predict the one-minute resting pulse rates. The results of this study can contribute to the evidence base for this commonly used aspect of patient care.

show abstract

Accuracy of Pulse Rates Counted for Fifteen, Thirty and Sixty Seconds

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Vital signs

Vital signs

Effect of measurement duration on accuracy of pulse-counting

A study of the effectiveness of different measuring times and counting methods of human radial pulse rates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About