Comparative performance of stimpod electromyography with mechanomyography for quantitative neuromuscular blockade monitoring.

PURPOSE:The purpose of this study was to compare the Stimpod electromyograph neuromuscular blockade monitor to mechanomyography, which is widely considered to be the reference standard. METHODS:The Stimpod electromyograph was used with its designated electrode array on the same hand as the mechanomyograph. Pairs of train-of-four measurements were recorded every 0.5-2 min. When the train-of-four count was zero on the electromyograph monitor, pairs of post tetanic count measurements were recorded every 2.5 min, instead of train-of-four measurements. Measurements were recorded from immediately after induction of anesthesia until just before emergence. Stimulation current was set to 60 mA with a duration of 200 microsec. The mechanomyography recording system recorded each twitch waveform for analysis. High resolution electromyograph waveforms were also recorded using a datalogger accessory provided by the manufacturer, facilitating inspection of individual waveforms. The administration of neuromuscular blocking drugs was left up to the discretion of the anesthesia care team. RESULTS:Twenty-three patients contributed 1,088 data pairs suitable for analysis. Bland-Altman analysis of 415 pairs of train-of-four ratios showed a bias of 0.028 and limits of agreement of -0.18 and 0.24. Two hundred seventy-three train-of-four count data pairs were compared by Cohen's quadratically weighted kappa which was calculated to be 0.44, indicating moderate agreement. Three hundred thirty-eight post tetanic count data pairs were compared by Cohen's quadradically weighted kappa which was calculated to be 0.80, indicating substantial agreement. CONCLUSION:The electromyograph produced results that were comparable to the mechanomyograph.