Cargando…
Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients
BACKGROUND: Cardiac rhythm monitoring is widely applied on hospitalized patients. However, its value has not been evaluated systematically. METHODS: This study considered the utility of our institutional telemetry guidelines in predicting clinically significant arrhythmias. A retrospective analysis...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elmer Press
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5358291/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28357019 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/cr129w |
_version_ | 1782516208518561792 |
---|---|
author | Dhillon, Sandeep K. JosephTawil, Goldstein, Baruch Eslava-Manchego, Dayana Singh, Jagdeep Hanon, Sam Schweitzer, Paul Bergmann, Steven R. |
author_facet | Dhillon, Sandeep K. JosephTawil, Goldstein, Baruch Eslava-Manchego, Dayana Singh, Jagdeep Hanon, Sam Schweitzer, Paul Bergmann, Steven R. |
author_sort | Dhillon, Sandeep K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cardiac rhythm monitoring is widely applied on hospitalized patients. However, its value has not been evaluated systematically. METHODS: This study considered the utility of our institutional telemetry guidelines in predicting clinically significant arrhythmias. A retrospective analysis was performed of 562 patients admitted to the telemetry unit. A total of 1932 monitoring days were evaluated. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on telemetry guidelines: “telemetry indicated” and “telemetry not indicated”. RESULTS: Differences in arrhythmia event rates and pre-defined clinical significance were determined. One hundred and forty-four (34%) vs. 16 (11%) patients had at least one arrhythmic event in the “telemetry indicated” group compared with the “telemetry not indicated” group, respectively (P = 0.001). No patient in the “telemetry not indicated” group had a clinically significant arrhythmia. In contrast, of patients in the “telemetry indicated” group who had at least one arrhythmic event, 36% were considered clinically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study validates and supports the use of our institutional telemetry guidelines to allocate this resource appropriately and predict clinically significant arrhythmias. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5358291 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Elmer Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53582912017-03-29 Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients Dhillon, Sandeep K. JosephTawil, Goldstein, Baruch Eslava-Manchego, Dayana Singh, Jagdeep Hanon, Sam Schweitzer, Paul Bergmann, Steven R. Cardiol Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Cardiac rhythm monitoring is widely applied on hospitalized patients. However, its value has not been evaluated systematically. METHODS: This study considered the utility of our institutional telemetry guidelines in predicting clinically significant arrhythmias. A retrospective analysis was performed of 562 patients admitted to the telemetry unit. A total of 1932 monitoring days were evaluated. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on telemetry guidelines: “telemetry indicated” and “telemetry not indicated”. RESULTS: Differences in arrhythmia event rates and pre-defined clinical significance were determined. One hundred and forty-four (34%) vs. 16 (11%) patients had at least one arrhythmic event in the “telemetry indicated” group compared with the “telemetry not indicated” group, respectively (P = 0.001). No patient in the “telemetry not indicated” group had a clinically significant arrhythmia. In contrast, of patients in the “telemetry indicated” group who had at least one arrhythmic event, 36% were considered clinically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study validates and supports the use of our institutional telemetry guidelines to allocate this resource appropriately and predict clinically significant arrhythmias. Elmer Press 2012-02 2012-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5358291/ /pubmed/28357019 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/cr129w Text en Copyright 2012, Dhillon et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Dhillon, Sandeep K. JosephTawil, Goldstein, Baruch Eslava-Manchego, Dayana Singh, Jagdeep Hanon, Sam Schweitzer, Paul Bergmann, Steven R. Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title | Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title_full | Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title_fullStr | Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title_short | Effectiveness of Telemetry Guidelines in Predicting Clinically Significant Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients |
title_sort | effectiveness of telemetry guidelines in predicting clinically significant arrhythmias in hospitalized patients |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5358291/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28357019 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/cr129w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dhillonsandeepk effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT josephtawil effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT goldsteinbaruch effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT eslavamanchegodayana effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT singhjagdeep effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT hanonsam effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT schweitzerpaul effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients AT bergmannstevenr effectivenessoftelemetryguidelinesinpredictingclinicallysignificantarrhythmiasinhospitalizedpatients |