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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |