Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Comparison of IBP, LIAP and UIAP

From: The effect of body position on compartmental intra-abdominal pressure following liver transplantation

Comparisons Number Mean IAP Range IAP COVA IAP r a p Bias Precision LLA ULA % Error
IBP vs LIAP All 338 9.43 0.0 to 19.0 43.6 0.99 < 0.001 0.03 0.59 -1.14 1.18 13
  Supine 169 9.23 0.5 to 18.0 43.7 0.99 < 0.001 0.06 0.62 -1.16 1.28 13
  30° HOB 169 9.63 0.0 to 19.0 43.6 0.99 < 0.001 -0.01 0.55 -1.07 1.09 11
IBP vs UIAP All 338 10.07 1.5 to 19.5 39.7 0.66 < 0.001 -1.25 3.63 -8.36 5.86 72
  Supine 169 10.49 2.5 to 19.5 38.9 0.70 < 0.001 -2.46 3.52 -9.36 4.44 67
  30° HOB 169 9.65 1.5 to 18.5 39.9 0.68 < 0.001 -0.05 3.34 -6.60 6.5 69
LIAP vs UIAP All 338 10.06 1.5 to 19.5 39.8 0.66 < 0.001 -1.28 3.63 -7.31 4.75 72
  Supine 169 10.46 2.5 to 19.5 39.3 0.70 < 0.001 -2.51 3.47 -9.31 4.29 66
  30° HOB 169 9.66 1.5 to 18.0 40.1 0.68 < 0.001 -0.05 3.36 -6.64 6.54 70
  1. The patient positioned supine and in a 30° head of bed angle. IBP, intra-bladder pressure; LIAP, lower intra-abdominal pressure; UIAP, upper intra-abdominal pressure; HOB, head of bed, IAP, intra-abdominal pressure; COVA; coefficient of variance; LLA, Lower level of agreement; ULA, Upper level of agreement. a r = Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.