Capillary refill time and cardiac output in children undergoing cardiac catheterization *
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Many pediatric healthcare providers believe that capillary refill time is a measure of perfusion and cardiac output in children. Despite its widespread use, there are no studies examining the relationship of capillary refill time to cardiac output in noncritically ill children. This study examined the inter-rater reliability of capillary refill time and its relationship to hemoglobin and with cardiac output in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary care pediatric hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 58 children, ages 0.3-17 yrs, with congenital heart disease undergoing cardiac catheterization. INTERVENTIONS: Two clinicians performed two measurements of capillary refill time in a standardized fashion on 58 children undergoing cardiac catheterization. Cardiac output was determined by the Fick method within 15 mins of the first assessment of capillary refill time (time 1). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Capillary refill time and cardiac output measurements were obtained in 44 children, and 108 paired measurements of capillary refill time were obtained to assess inter-rater reliability. The mean capillary refill time was 1.2 secs (±0.5 secs), and the mean cardiac output was 3.6 L/min/m (2.2-5.7 L/min/m). The inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.12 (time 1) (95% confidence interval -0.15 to +0.37) and was 0.32 (95% confidence interval 0.058-0.54) at the end of the catheterization (time 2). A significant association was noted between average capillary refill time at time 1 and hemoglobin, with higher hemoglobin correlating with longer capillary refill time (p = .015). There was no significant correlation between the average capillary refill time taken at the time of cardiac output measurement (time 1) and measured cardiac output (r = .331, 95% confidence interval for r, .066-.552). CONCLUSIONS: We found that the inter-rater reliability of capillary refill time was poor and variable under controlled conditions and capillary refill time was not correlated with cardiac output in anesthetized nonacutely ill pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Caution should be used in inferring cardiac output from capillary refill time measurements alone.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Estimations of cardiac function, cardiac output, and tissue oxygenation based on standard clinical parameters such as physical examination, central venous pressure, heart rate, and blood pressure are often discordant from measured values.
“It is important to appreciate that estimations of cardiac function, cardiac output and tissue oxygenation, based on the interpretation of standard clinical parameters, such as the physical examination, and hemodynamic parameters such as the central venous pressure, heart rate and blood pressure are often discordant from measured values [7, 8].”
From Management of the Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Following Surgery for Congenital Heart Disease (2016) · cites this paper as [8]
Cites
Tibby, S. M., Hatherill, M., & Murdoch, I. A. (1999) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/adc.80.2.163 · Cited by 152 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Tibby et al (7) examined the relationship between CRT and hemodynamic parameters in 55 critically ill pediatric patients in the intensive care unit.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Management of the Low Cardiac Output Syndrome Following Surgery for Congenital Heart Disease
K. Chandler, H., & Kirsch, R. (2016) · Current Cardiology Reviews · doi:10.2174/1573403x12666151119164647 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
“It is important to appreciate that estimations of cardiac function, cardiac output and tissue oxygenation, based on the interpretation of standard clinical parameters, such as the physical examination, and hemodynamic parameters such as the central venous pressure, heart rate and blood pressure are often discordant fr…”
Background
- Authors
- Lobos, A.-T., Lee, S., & Menon, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- ORCID
- Menon, Kusum
- Venue
- Pediatric Critical Care Medicine
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 136-140
- ISSN
- 1529-7535 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2085067830
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pediatric Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- capillary refill time, cardiac output, inter-rater reliability, hemoglobin, pediatric cardiac catheterization, congenital heart disease, perfusion assessment
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Capillaries, Cardiac Output, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Fingers, Foot, Cardiac Catheterization, Heart Defects, Congenital, Hemoglobins, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Prospective Studies, Regional Blood Flow, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review