Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Charles D Deakin a Shackleton Department of Anaesthetics,
Southampton General Hospital NHS Trust, Southampton SO16 6YD, b Health Care Research Unit, Southampton
General Hospital NHS Trust, Southampton SO16
6YD
Correspondence to: C D
Deakin cddeakin{at}hotmail.com
The advanced trauma life support course teaches
that if only the patient's carotid pulse is palpable, the
systolic blood pressure is 60-70 mm Hg; if carotid and femoral pulses
are palpable, the systolic blood pressure is 70-80 mm Hg; and if the
radial pulse is also palpable, the systolic blood pressure is more
than 80 mm Hg.1 The only study to examine the accuracy of
this model used non-invasive blood pressure measurements, which
have a tendency to underestimate systemic arterial blood pressure
during hypotension.2 No reliable data are therefore
available to support the advanced trauma life support guidelines on
which clinical decisions are made. We assessed whether the guidelines
accurately predict systolic blood pressure by palpation of radial,
femoral, and carotid pulses in hypovolaemic patients in whom blood
pressure was measured using invasive arterial monitoring.
After obtaining approval of the study by the ethics committee, we
studied sequential patients with hypotension secondary to hypovolaemic
shock and in whom invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring had been
established. An observer blinded to the blood pressure palpated the
radial, femoral, and carotid pulses, and the invasive systolic blood
pressure was recorded.
The 20 sequential patients studied over the three
year period were aged 18-79 years. Not all pulses were palpable when a
reading was taken because a sterile operating field impaired access to the patients. The radial pulse always disappeared before the femoral pulse, which always disappeared before the carotid pulse. The data were
split into four subgroups: radial, femoral, and carotid pulses present
(group 1), femoral and carotid pulses only (group 2), carotid pulse
only (group 3), and radial, femoral, and carotid pulses absent (group
4).
![]()
Methods and results
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References

View larger version (14K):
[in a new window]
Dot plot showing the distribution of systolic blood pressure
according to palpable pulses (group 1: radial, femoral, and carotid
pulses present; group 2: femoral and carotid pulses only; group 3:
carotid pulse only; group 4: radial, femoral, and carotid pulses
absent); shaded areas indicate blood pressures expected according to
advanced trauma life support guidelines
The figure shows the distribution of the systolic blood pressure in each of these groups. The reference lines in the figure at 80 mm Hg, 70 mm Hg, and 60 mm Hg represent the values that, according to the advanced trauma life support guidelines, the systolic blood pressure is expected to exceed for groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively.
In group 1, 10/12 (83%) subjects had a systolic blood pressure <80 mm
Hg (mean 72.5 mm Hg (reference range 55.3-89.7 mm Hg)). In group 2, 10/12 (83%) subjects had a systolic blood pressure <70 mm Hg
(mean 66.4 mm Hg (50.9-81.9 mm Hg)). In group 3, none of the four
patients had a systolic blood pressure >60 mm Hg as predicted by the
advanced trauma life support guidelines. And in group 4, 2/3 patients
had a systolic blood pressure <60 mm Hg as predicted by the advanced
trauma life support guidelines.
| |
Comment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The advanced trauma life support guidelines for assessing
systolic blood pressure are inaccurate and generally overestimate the
patient's systolic blood pressure and therefore underestimate the
degree of hypovolaemia. The minimum blood pressure predicted by the
guidelines was exceeded in only four of 20 patients. The mean blood
pressure and reference range obtained for each group indicate that the
guidelines overestimate the systolic blood pressure associated with the
number of pulses present. This study therefore does not support
the teaching of the advanced trauma life support course on the relation
between palpable pulses and systolic blood pressure.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: Data collection was carried out by CDD. JLL did the statistical analysis. CDD and JLL both wrote the report. CDD is the guarantor.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: None.
Competing interests: None declared.
This article is part of the BMJ's
randomised controlled trial of open peer review. Documentation relating
to the editorial decision making process is available on the BMJ's
website
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Collicott PE. Advanced trauma life support course for physicians. Chicago: American College of Surgeons, 1985. |
| 2. | Poulton TJ. ATLS paradigm fails. Ann Emerg Med 1988; 17: 107[Medline]. |
(Accepted 5 April 2000)
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+