Background Children and Young People (CYP) with acute illness require routine assessment of their physiological observations. There is no agreement as to what the standard reference ranges of vital signs in children and young people are. Existing reference ranges of vital signs that are currently used in clinical practice are minimally supported by empirical evidence. They are also sometimes conflicting.
Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study using 66356 admission episodes to analyze routinely collected age-specific respiratory rate, heart rate, and blood pressure observations of CYP aged 0-19 years old at hospital discharge. Quantile regression with Restricted Cubic Splines was used to model age-specific centiles. These were then compared with standard reference ranges and literature.
Results New centile charts for vital signs are presented. Advanced Paediatric Life Support (APLS, 6th Ed.) reference ranges for respiratory rate and blood pressure poorly aligned to the centiles derived in this study although the centiles for heart rate align well. Variance was also demonstrated between the study centiles and those from the clinical papers, with the greatest differences seen in the upper centiles. Similarly, in comparison with APLS reference ranges, heart rate showed best alignment.
Conclusions This is the first-time physiological observations of CYP in a UK Children’s hospital have been described and centile charts developed. Current widely used reference ranges especially those for Heart Rate and Respiratory Rate are not fit for purpose when evaluating whether the vital signs of a child are normal or otherwise.
Dr Joseph C. Manning is a current recipient of an NIHR (National Institute for Health and Social Care Research) HEE (Health Education England) funded ICA (Integrated Clinical Academic) Clinical Lectureship [ICA-CL-2018-04-ST2-009]. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or Department of Health and Social Care, UK. All other authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose.
This research was funded through a personal award (Taylor) from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, UK.
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
NHS Health Research Authority Research Ethics committee approval was not required for this study. Institutional Governance Approval was obtained from Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors