Cargando…

Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study

BACKGROUND: Heart rate (HR) assessment is crucial in neonatal resuscitation, but pulse oximetry (PO) and electrocardiography (ECG) are rarely accessible in low-resource to middle-resource settings. This study evaluated a free-of-charge smartphone application, NeoTap, which records HR with a screen-t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Myrnerts Höök, Susanna, Pejovic, Nicolas J, Cavallin, Francesco, Lubulwa, Clare, Byamugisha, Josaphat, Nankunda, Jolly, Tylleskär, Thorkild, Alfven, Tobias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7381998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32760813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2020-000688
_version_ 1783563163413774336
author Myrnerts Höök, Susanna
Pejovic, Nicolas J
Cavallin, Francesco
Lubulwa, Clare
Byamugisha, Josaphat
Nankunda, Jolly
Tylleskär, Thorkild
Alfven, Tobias
author_facet Myrnerts Höök, Susanna
Pejovic, Nicolas J
Cavallin, Francesco
Lubulwa, Clare
Byamugisha, Josaphat
Nankunda, Jolly
Tylleskär, Thorkild
Alfven, Tobias
author_sort Myrnerts Höök, Susanna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Heart rate (HR) assessment is crucial in neonatal resuscitation, but pulse oximetry (PO) and electrocardiography (ECG) are rarely accessible in low-resource to middle-resource settings. This study evaluated a free-of-charge smartphone application, NeoTap, which records HR with a screen-tapping method bypassing mental arithmetic calculations. METHODS: This observational study was carried out during three time periods between May 2015 and January 2019 in Uganda in three phases. In phase 1, a metronome rate (n=180) was recorded by low-end users (midwives) using NeoTap. In phase 2, HR (n=69) in breathing neonates was recorded by high-end users (paediatricians) using NeoTap versus PO. In phase 3, HR (n=235) in non-breathing neonates was recorded by low-end users using NeoTap versus ECG. RESULTS: In high-end users the mean difference was 3 beats per minute (bpm) higher with NeoTap versus PO (95% agreement limits −14 to 19 bpm), with acquisition time of 5 seconds. In low-end users, the mean difference was 6 bpm lower with NeoTap versus metronome (95% agreement limits −26 to 14 bpm) and 3 bpm higher with NeoTap versus ECG in non-breathing neonates (95% agreement limits −48 to 53 bpm), with acquisition time of 2.7 seconds. The agreement between NeoTap and ECG was good in the HR categories of 60–99 bpm and ≥100 bpm; HR <60 bpm had few measurements (kappa index 0.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.79). CONCLUSION: HR could be accurately and rapidly assessed using a smartphone application in breathing neonates in a low-resource setting. Clinical assessment by low-end users was less accurate with wider CI but still adds clinically important information in non-breathing neonates. The authors suggest low-end users may benefit from auscultation-focused training. More research is needed to evaluate its feasibility in clinical use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7381998
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73819982020-08-04 Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study Myrnerts Höök, Susanna Pejovic, Nicolas J Cavallin, Francesco Lubulwa, Clare Byamugisha, Josaphat Nankunda, Jolly Tylleskär, Thorkild Alfven, Tobias BMJ Paediatr Open Neonatology BACKGROUND: Heart rate (HR) assessment is crucial in neonatal resuscitation, but pulse oximetry (PO) and electrocardiography (ECG) are rarely accessible in low-resource to middle-resource settings. This study evaluated a free-of-charge smartphone application, NeoTap, which records HR with a screen-tapping method bypassing mental arithmetic calculations. METHODS: This observational study was carried out during three time periods between May 2015 and January 2019 in Uganda in three phases. In phase 1, a metronome rate (n=180) was recorded by low-end users (midwives) using NeoTap. In phase 2, HR (n=69) in breathing neonates was recorded by high-end users (paediatricians) using NeoTap versus PO. In phase 3, HR (n=235) in non-breathing neonates was recorded by low-end users using NeoTap versus ECG. RESULTS: In high-end users the mean difference was 3 beats per minute (bpm) higher with NeoTap versus PO (95% agreement limits −14 to 19 bpm), with acquisition time of 5 seconds. In low-end users, the mean difference was 6 bpm lower with NeoTap versus metronome (95% agreement limits −26 to 14 bpm) and 3 bpm higher with NeoTap versus ECG in non-breathing neonates (95% agreement limits −48 to 53 bpm), with acquisition time of 2.7 seconds. The agreement between NeoTap and ECG was good in the HR categories of 60–99 bpm and ≥100 bpm; HR <60 bpm had few measurements (kappa index 0.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.79). CONCLUSION: HR could be accurately and rapidly assessed using a smartphone application in breathing neonates in a low-resource setting. Clinical assessment by low-end users was less accurate with wider CI but still adds clinically important information in non-breathing neonates. The authors suggest low-end users may benefit from auscultation-focused training. More research is needed to evaluate its feasibility in clinical use. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7381998/ /pubmed/32760813 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2020-000688 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Neonatology
Myrnerts Höök, Susanna
Pejovic, Nicolas J
Cavallin, Francesco
Lubulwa, Clare
Byamugisha, Josaphat
Nankunda, Jolly
Tylleskär, Thorkild
Alfven, Tobias
Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title_full Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title_fullStr Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title_full_unstemmed Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title_short Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
title_sort smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
topic Neonatology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7381998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32760813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2020-000688
work_keys_str_mv AT myrnertshooksusanna smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT pejovicnicolasj smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT cavallinfrancesco smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT lubulwaclare smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT byamugishajosaphat smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT nankundajolly smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT tylleskarthorkild smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy
AT alfventobias smartphoneappforneonatalheartrateassessmentanobservationalstudy