TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of the Mercy TAPE
T2 - Performance against the standard for pediatric weight estimation
AU - Abdel-Rahman, Susan M.
AU - Paul, Ian M.
AU - James, Laura P.
AU - Lewandowski, Andrew
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org ). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. This work was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development contract HHSN2752010000031 for the Pediatric Trial Network, Task Order HHSN27500008 (Drs. Abdel-Rahman, Paul, and James), and contract HHSN275200900012C (Dr. Lewandowski). Children's Mercy Hospital (CMH) has filed for a patent on the devices described in this article. CMH will own the patent if awarded. CMH does not have, never has had, and will not develop an interest in extracting royalties for use of the invention in developing countries or in situations in which royalties could hinder adoption of this medically advantageous device.
PY - 2013/10
Y1 - 2013/10
N2 - Study objective: We assessed the performance of 2 new devices (2D- and 3D-Mercy TAPE) to implement the Mercy Method for pediatric weight estimation and contrasted their accuracy with the Broselow method. Methods: We enrolled children aged 2 months through 16 years in this prospective, multicenter, observational study. Height/length, weight, humeral length, and mid-upper arm circumference were obtained for each child, using calibrated scales and measures. We then made measurements with blinded versions of the 2D- and 3D-TAPEs. Using height/length data, we calculated the weight estimated by the Broselow method. We contrasted measures with mean error, mean percentage error, and percentage predicted within 10% and 20% of actual. Results: Six hundred twenty-four participants (median 8.5 years, 27.6 kg, 17.3 kg/m2) completed the study. Mean error was 0.3 kg (mean percentage error 1.6%), 0.2 kg (mean percentage error 1.9%), and -1.3 kg (mean percentage error -4.1%) for 2D-, 3D-, and Broselow, respectively. Concordance between both TAPE devices and the Mercy Method was greater than 0.99. The proportion of children predicted within 10% and 20% of actual weight was 76% and 98% for the 2D-TAPE and 65% and 93% for the 3D-TAPE. Excluding the 209 (33%) children who were too tall for the device, Broselow predictions were within 10% and 20% of actual weight in 59% and 91%. Conclusion: The 2D- and 3D-Mercy TAPEs outperform the Broselow tape for pediatric weight estimation and can be used in a wider range of children.
AB - Study objective: We assessed the performance of 2 new devices (2D- and 3D-Mercy TAPE) to implement the Mercy Method for pediatric weight estimation and contrasted their accuracy with the Broselow method. Methods: We enrolled children aged 2 months through 16 years in this prospective, multicenter, observational study. Height/length, weight, humeral length, and mid-upper arm circumference were obtained for each child, using calibrated scales and measures. We then made measurements with blinded versions of the 2D- and 3D-TAPEs. Using height/length data, we calculated the weight estimated by the Broselow method. We contrasted measures with mean error, mean percentage error, and percentage predicted within 10% and 20% of actual. Results: Six hundred twenty-four participants (median 8.5 years, 27.6 kg, 17.3 kg/m2) completed the study. Mean error was 0.3 kg (mean percentage error 1.6%), 0.2 kg (mean percentage error 1.9%), and -1.3 kg (mean percentage error -4.1%) for 2D-, 3D-, and Broselow, respectively. Concordance between both TAPE devices and the Mercy Method was greater than 0.99. The proportion of children predicted within 10% and 20% of actual weight was 76% and 98% for the 2D-TAPE and 65% and 93% for the 3D-TAPE. Excluding the 209 (33%) children who were too tall for the device, Broselow predictions were within 10% and 20% of actual weight in 59% and 91%. Conclusion: The 2D- and 3D-Mercy TAPEs outperform the Broselow tape for pediatric weight estimation and can be used in a wider range of children.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84884500209&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84884500209&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.021
DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.021
M3 - Article
C2 - 23602655
AN - SCOPUS:84884500209
SN - 0196-0644
VL - 62
SP - 332-339.e6
JO - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
JF - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
IS - 4
ER -