I found the topic of this article quite potentially useful, as there is little value in measuring or quantifying data when, in fact, you are not measuring what you think you are measuring. The article was basically asking if the measurement of neuromuscular blockade using the muscles of the face and orbit really tells us much about the overall recovery of skeletal muscle function. And the narrower answer being sought by the anesthetist is whether there is sufficient muscle function for effective ventilation. A noble question, to be sure.

I was a bit confused on the methodology, however. If we have the ability to compare the two methods simultaneously in the OR prior to transport to the PACU, would not our baseline give us more useful data when evaluating the PACU values? It may be rare, but recurarization is still a potential phenomenon, and having two data sets from the period prior to arriving in the PACU could help eliminate these types of variables. Even noting the difference between the two assessments in the OR might shed light on the usefulness of these different measurement locations.

I would have liked to see 100% of patients assessed both with qualitative measurement at the orbicularis muscles AND quantitative measurement at the adductor pollicis. This would provide real-time comparative data devoid of possible time sensitive effects.