Agreement between Capillary Refill Time measured at Finger and Earlobe sites in different positions: a pilot prospective study on healthy volunteers

Abstract Background Capillary Refill Time (CRT) is a marker of peripheral perfusion usually performed at fingertip; however, its evaluation at other sites/position may be advantageous. Moreover, arm position during CRT assessment has not been fully standardized. Methods We performed a pilot prospective observational study in 82 healthy volunteers. CRT was assessed: a) in standard position with participants in semi-recumbent position; b) at 30° forearm elevation, c and d) at earlobe site in semi-recumbent and supine position. Bland–Altman analysis was performed to calculate bias and limits of agreement (LoA). Correlation was investigated with Pearson test. Results Standard finger CRT values (1.04 s [0.80;1.39]) were similar to the earlobe semi-recumbent ones (1.10 s [0.90;1.26]; p = 0.52), with Bias 0.02 ± 0.18 s (LoA -0.33;0.37); correlation was weak but significant (r = 0.28 [0.7;0.47]; p = 0.01). Conversely, standard finger CRT was significantly longer than earlobe supine CRT (0.88 s [0.75;1.06]; p < 0.001) with Bias 0.22 ± 0.4 s (LoA -0.56;1.0), and no correlation (r = 0,12 [-0,09;0,33]; p = 0.27]. As compared with standard finger CRT, measurement with 30° forearm elevation was significantly longer (1.17 s [0.93;1.41] p = 0.03), with Bias -0.07 ± 0.3 s (LoA -0.61;0.47) and with a significant correlation of moderate degree (r = 0.67 [0.53;0.77]; p < 0.001). Conclusions In healthy volunteers, the elevation of the forearm significantly prolongs CRT values. CRT measured at the earlobe in semi-recumbent position may represent a valid surrogate when access to the finger is not feasible, whilst earlobe CRT measured in supine position yields different results. Research is needed in critically ill patients to evaluate accuracy and precision at different sites/positions.