...
首页> 外文期刊>Cardiology Journal >Kardia Mobile applicability in clinical practice: A comparison of Kardia Mobile and standard 12-lead electrocardiogram records in 100 consecutive patients of a tertiary cardiovascular care center
【24h】

Kardia Mobile applicability in clinical practice: A comparison of Kardia Mobile and standard 12-lead electrocardiogram records in 100 consecutive patients of a tertiary cardiovascular care center

机译:Kardia在临床实践中的移动适用性:Kardia Mobile和标准12铅心电图记录在第三款三级心血管护理中心的患者中的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Mobile devices are gaining a rising number of users in all countries around the globe. Novel solutions to diagnose patients with out-of-hospital onset of arrhythmic symptoms can be easily used to record such events, but the effectiveness of these devices remain unknown. In a group of 100 consecutive patients of an academic cardiology care center (mean age 68 ± 14.2 years, males: 66%) a standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and a Kardia Mobile (KM) record were registered. Both versions were assessed by three independant groups of physicians. The analysis of comparisons for standard ECG and KM records showed that the latter is of lower quality (p 0.001). It was non-inferior for detection of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter, showed weaker rhythm detection in pacemaker stimulation (p = 0.008), and was superior in sinus rhythm detection (p =0.02), though. The sensitivity of KM to detect pathological Q-wave was low compared to specificity (20.6% vs. 93.7%, respectively, p 0.001). Basic intervals measured by the KM device, namely PQ, RR, and QT were significantly different (shorter) than those observed in the standard ECG method (160 ms vs. 180 ms [p 0.001], 853 ms vs. 880 ms [p =0.03] and 393 ms vs. 400 ms [p 0.001], respectively). Initial and indicative value of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter detection in KM is comparable to results achieved in standard ECG. KM was superior in detection of sinus rhythm than eye-ball evaluation of 12-lead ECG. Though, the PQ and QT intervals were shorter in KM as compared to 12-lead ECG. Clinical value needs to be verified in large studies, though.
机译:移动设备在全球各个国家/地区获得了升高的用户数目。新的溶解患者诊断出心律失常症状的医院外发病症状的患者可以很容易地用于记录这些事件,但这些装置的有效性仍然是未知的。在一组学术内科护理中心(平均年龄68±14.2岁)的一组连续100名患者中,注册了标准的12铅心电图(ECG)和Kardia Mobile(KM)记录。两个版本由三个独立的医生群体评估。标准ECG和KM记录的比较分析表明,后者质量较低(P <0.001)。对于心房颤动和心房颤动的检测是非较差的,在起搏器刺激中显示出较弱的节律检测(P = 0.008),并且在窦性节律检测中优异(p = 0.02)。与特异性相比,Km以检测病理Q波的敏感性(分别为20.6%,分别为93.7%,P <0.001)。通过KM设备测量的基本间隔,即PQ,RR和QT的显着不同(较短),而不是标准ECG方法中观察到的那些(160ms与180ms [P <0.001],853ms与880ms [p = 0.03]和393ms与400ms [P <0.001]分别)。处于Km的心房颤动和心房颤动检测的初始和指示值与标准ECG中所达到的结果相当。 KM在检测到12引导ECG的窦性心律评估的窦性心律的检测中高。虽然,与12引导ECG相比,PQ和QT间隔较短。然而,需要在大型研究中核实临床价值。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号