Cargando…

Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation

Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations we...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rettedal, Siren, Eilevstjønn, Joar, Kibsgaard, Amalie, Kvaløy, Jan Terje, Ersdal, Hege
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34943288
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8121092
_version_ 1784620694738305024
author Rettedal, Siren
Eilevstjønn, Joar
Kibsgaard, Amalie
Kvaløy, Jan Terje
Ersdal, Hege
author_facet Rettedal, Siren
Eilevstjønn, Joar
Kibsgaard, Amalie
Kvaløy, Jan Terje
Ersdal, Hege
author_sort Rettedal, Siren
collection PubMed
description Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations were video recorded, and HR was registered every second. Results: Device placement time from birth was median (quartiles) 6 (4, 18) seconds for NeoBeat versus 138 (97, 181) seconds for ECG and 152 (103, 216) seconds for PO. Time to first HR presentation from birth was 22 (13, 45) seconds for NeoBeat versus 171 (129, 239) seconds for ECG and 270 (185, 357) seconds for PO. Proportion of time with HR feedback from NeoBeat during resuscitation from birth was 85 (69, 93)%, from arrival at the resuscitation table 98 (85, 100)%, and during positive pressure ventilation 100 (95, 100)%. For ECG, these proportions were, 25 (0, 43)%, 28 (0, 56)%, and 33 (0, 66)% and for PO, 0 (0, 16)%, 0 (0, 16)%, and 0 (0, 18)%. All p < 0.0001. Conclusions: NeoBeat was faster to place, presented HR more rapidly, and provided feedback on HR for a larger proportion of time during ongoing resuscitation compared to 3-lead ECG and PO.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8700180
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87001802021-12-24 Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation Rettedal, Siren Eilevstjønn, Joar Kibsgaard, Amalie Kvaløy, Jan Terje Ersdal, Hege Children (Basel) Article Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations were video recorded, and HR was registered every second. Results: Device placement time from birth was median (quartiles) 6 (4, 18) seconds for NeoBeat versus 138 (97, 181) seconds for ECG and 152 (103, 216) seconds for PO. Time to first HR presentation from birth was 22 (13, 45) seconds for NeoBeat versus 171 (129, 239) seconds for ECG and 270 (185, 357) seconds for PO. Proportion of time with HR feedback from NeoBeat during resuscitation from birth was 85 (69, 93)%, from arrival at the resuscitation table 98 (85, 100)%, and during positive pressure ventilation 100 (95, 100)%. For ECG, these proportions were, 25 (0, 43)%, 28 (0, 56)%, and 33 (0, 66)% and for PO, 0 (0, 16)%, 0 (0, 16)%, and 0 (0, 18)%. All p < 0.0001. Conclusions: NeoBeat was faster to place, presented HR more rapidly, and provided feedback on HR for a larger proportion of time during ongoing resuscitation compared to 3-lead ECG and PO. MDPI 2021-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8700180/ /pubmed/34943288 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8121092 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Rettedal, Siren
Eilevstjønn, Joar
Kibsgaard, Amalie
Kvaløy, Jan Terje
Ersdal, Hege
Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title_full Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title_fullStr Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title_short Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
title_sort comparison of heart rate feedback from dry-electrode ecg, 3-lead ecg, and pulse oximetry during newborn resuscitation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34943288
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8121092
work_keys_str_mv AT rettedalsiren comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation
AT eilevstjønnjoar comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation
AT kibsgaardamalie comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation
AT kvaløyjanterje comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation
AT ersdalhege comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation