File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1111/1742-6723.12644
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84988672611
- PMID: 27654988
- WOS: WOS:000388600100010
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Finger counting method is more accurate than age-based weight estimation formulae in estimating the weight of Hong Kong children presenting to the emergency department
Title | Finger counting method is more accurate than age-based weight estimation formulae in estimating the weight of Hong Kong children presenting to the emergency department |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | child bodyweights and measures preschool Hong Kong Dimensional Measurement Accuracy infant |
Issue Date | 2016 |
Citation | EMA - Emergency Medicine Australasia, 2016, v. 28, n. 6, p. 691-697 How to Cite? |
Abstract | © 2016 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the finger counting method and compare its performance with four commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae in children aged 1–9 years presenting to the ED in Hong Kong. Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study of children aged 1–9 years who presented to the ED of a tertiary referral hospital in Hong Kong over a 6 month period was conducted. Actual weight was compared with estimated weight using the finger counting method and four commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae. Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the degree of agreement in which the mean percentage difference (MPD) and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. Root mean squared error (RMSE) and proportions of weight estimates within 10%, 15% and 20% of actual weight were determined. Results: A total of 4178 children were included. The finger counting method was the most accurate method (MPD 0.1%; 95% LOA −34.0% to 34.2%). The original Advanced Paediatric Life Support (APLS) formula (MPD −7.0%; 95% LOA −38.4% to 24.3%) and the updated APLS formula (MPD −0.4%; 95% LOA −38.5% to 37.8%) underestimated weight whereas the Luscombe formula (MPD 7.2%; 95% LOA −31.8% to 46.2%) and the Best Guess formula (MPD 10.6%; 95% LOA −27.3% to 48.4%) overestimated weight. The finger counting method had smallest RMSE of 4.06 kg and estimated the largest proportion of children within 10%, 15% and 20% of actual weight. Conclusion: The finger counting method outperforms the commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae in children aged 1–9 years presenting to the ED in Hong Kong. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/292973 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 1.7 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.755 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | So, Jerome L.T. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chow, Eric P.F. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Cattermole, Giles N. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Graham, Colin A. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Rainer, Timothy H. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-11-17T14:57:36Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-11-17T14:57:36Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | EMA - Emergency Medicine Australasia, 2016, v. 28, n. 6, p. 691-697 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1742-6731 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/292973 | - |
dc.description.abstract | © 2016 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the finger counting method and compare its performance with four commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae in children aged 1–9 years presenting to the ED in Hong Kong. Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study of children aged 1–9 years who presented to the ED of a tertiary referral hospital in Hong Kong over a 6 month period was conducted. Actual weight was compared with estimated weight using the finger counting method and four commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae. Bland–Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the degree of agreement in which the mean percentage difference (MPD) and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. Root mean squared error (RMSE) and proportions of weight estimates within 10%, 15% and 20% of actual weight were determined. Results: A total of 4178 children were included. The finger counting method was the most accurate method (MPD 0.1%; 95% LOA −34.0% to 34.2%). The original Advanced Paediatric Life Support (APLS) formula (MPD −7.0%; 95% LOA −38.4% to 24.3%) and the updated APLS formula (MPD −0.4%; 95% LOA −38.5% to 37.8%) underestimated weight whereas the Luscombe formula (MPD 7.2%; 95% LOA −31.8% to 46.2%) and the Best Guess formula (MPD 10.6%; 95% LOA −27.3% to 48.4%) overestimated weight. The finger counting method had smallest RMSE of 4.06 kg and estimated the largest proportion of children within 10%, 15% and 20% of actual weight. Conclusion: The finger counting method outperforms the commonly used age-based weight estimation formulae in children aged 1–9 years presenting to the ED in Hong Kong. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | EMA - Emergency Medicine Australasia | - |
dc.subject | child | - |
dc.subject | bodyweights and measures | - |
dc.subject | preschool | - |
dc.subject | Hong Kong | - |
dc.subject | Dimensional Measurement Accuracy | - |
dc.subject | infant | - |
dc.title | Finger counting method is more accurate than age-based weight estimation formulae in estimating the weight of Hong Kong children presenting to the emergency department | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/1742-6723.12644 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 27654988 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84988672611 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 28 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 6 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 691 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 697 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1742-6723 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000388600100010 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1742-6723 | - |