The TOF‐Guard neuromuscular transmission monitor

The TOF‐Guard neuromuscular monitor uses an accelerometer to measure the response to nerve stimulation. In this study, we have compared it to a standard mechanomyographic monitor, the Myograph 2000, for neuromuscular monitoring in 28 subjects. A train‐of‐four mode of stimulation was used in both cases. The times taken for onset of block, and for the recovery of T1 (the first response in the train of four) to 25% of control, the time from recovery of T1 from 25–75% and for the recovery of the train of four ratio to 0.7 were compared with the two monitors. There was a good correlation between the two devices for both onset and recovery times. However, differences were highlighted when the data were analysed by the method of Bland and Altman. The 95% limits of agreement for the T1 recovery to 25%, as measured by the TOF‐Guard, ranged from 5 min less to 8 min more than when measured by the Myograph 2000. For recovery of the train of four ratio to 0.7, the limits of agreement were approximately 6 min in either direction. The 95% limits for the TOF‐Guard measured train of four ratio were from 0.47 to 0.99, at the Myograph reading of 0.7. We recommend that information from the TOF‐Guard and the Myograph 2000 should not be used interchangeably. However, the TOF‐Guard is likely to improve considerably on tactile evaluation of the responses to stimulation.

[1]  D R Westenskow,et al.  An Effectiveness Study of a New Piezoelectric Sensor for Train‐of–Four Measurement , 1994, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[2]  N. Harper,et al.  Monitoring neuromuscular block by acceleromyography: comparison of the Mini-Accelograph with the Myograph 2000. , 1994, British journal of anaesthesia.

[3]  G. Shorten.  Postoperative Residual Curarisation: Incidence, Aetiology and Associated Morbidity , 1993, Anaesthesia and intensive care.

[4]  Crofts Sl,et al.  Clinical monitoring of neuromuscular function. , 1992 .

[5]  D. Silverman,et al.  Accelographic train-of-four at near-threshold currents. , 1992, Anesthesiology.

[6]  T. Pedersen,et al.  Does perioperative tactile evaluation of the train-of-four response influence the frequency of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade? , 1990, Anesthesiology.

[7]  M. Werner,et al.  The acceleration transducer – an assessment of its precision in comparison with a force displacement transducer , 1988, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[8]  J. Viby Mogensen,et al.  Measurement of acceleration: a new method of monitoring neuromuscular function , 1988, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[9]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[10]  L. Skovgaard,et al.  Tactile and visual evaluation of the response to train-of-four nerve stimulation. , 1985, Anesthesiology.

[11]  T. H. Joyce,et al.  VECURONIUM, A POTENTIAL PROBLEM IN POSTPARTUM PATIENTS FOR BTL , 1985 .

[12]  J. Viby-Mogensen,et al.  Residual curarization in the recovery room. , 1979, Anesthesiology.

[13]  A. Beckett,et al.  AKUFO AND IBARAPA. , 1965, Lancet.