Cargando…

Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)

AIMS: Handheld electrocardiogram (ECG) monitors are increasingly used by both healthcare workers and patients to diagnose cardiac arrhythmias. There is a lack of studies validating the use of handheld devices against the standard 12-lead ECG. The Kardia 6L is a novel handheld ECG monitor which can p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Azram, Mohammad, Ahmed, Noura, Leese, Lucy, Brigham, Matthew, Bowes, Robert, Wheatcroft, Stephen B, Ngantcha, Marcus, Stegemann, Berthold, Crowther, George, Tayebjee, Muzahir H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9707882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36713105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztab083
_version_ 1784840798647353344
author Azram, Mohammad
Ahmed, Noura
Leese, Lucy
Brigham, Matthew
Bowes, Robert
Wheatcroft, Stephen B
Ngantcha, Marcus
Stegemann, Berthold
Crowther, George
Tayebjee, Muzahir H
author_facet Azram, Mohammad
Ahmed, Noura
Leese, Lucy
Brigham, Matthew
Bowes, Robert
Wheatcroft, Stephen B
Ngantcha, Marcus
Stegemann, Berthold
Crowther, George
Tayebjee, Muzahir H
author_sort Azram, Mohammad
collection PubMed
description AIMS: Handheld electrocardiogram (ECG) monitors are increasingly used by both healthcare workers and patients to diagnose cardiac arrhythmias. There is a lack of studies validating the use of handheld devices against the standard 12-lead ECG. The Kardia 6L is a novel handheld ECG monitor which can produce a 6-lead ECG. In this study, we compare the 6L ECG against the 12-lead ECG. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective study consisting of unselected cardiac inpatients and outpatients at Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust. All participants had a 12- and 6-lead ECGs. All ECG parameters were analysed by using a standard method template for consistency between independent observers. Electrocardiograms from the recorders were compared by the following statistical methods: linear regression, Bland–Altman, receiver operator curve, and kappa analysis. There were 1015 patients recruited. The mean differences between recorders were small for PR, QRS, cardiac axis, with receiver operator analysis area under the curve (AUC) of >80%. Mean differences for QT and QTc (between recorders) were also small, with AUCs for QT leads of >75% and AUCs for QTc leads of >60%. Key findings from Bland–Altman analysis demonstrate overall an acceptable agreement with few outliers instances (<6%, Bland–Altman analysis). CONCLUSION: Several parameters recorded by the Kardia 6L (QT interval in all six leads, rhythm detection, PR interval, QRS duration, and cardiac axis) perform closely to the gold standard 12-lead ECG. However, that consistency weakens for left ventricular hypertrophy, QRS amplitudes (Lead I and AVL), and ischaemic changes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9707882
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97078822023-01-27 Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio) Azram, Mohammad Ahmed, Noura Leese, Lucy Brigham, Matthew Bowes, Robert Wheatcroft, Stephen B Ngantcha, Marcus Stegemann, Berthold Crowther, George Tayebjee, Muzahir H Eur Heart J Digit Health Original Articles AIMS: Handheld electrocardiogram (ECG) monitors are increasingly used by both healthcare workers and patients to diagnose cardiac arrhythmias. There is a lack of studies validating the use of handheld devices against the standard 12-lead ECG. The Kardia 6L is a novel handheld ECG monitor which can produce a 6-lead ECG. In this study, we compare the 6L ECG against the 12-lead ECG. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective study consisting of unselected cardiac inpatients and outpatients at Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust. All participants had a 12- and 6-lead ECGs. All ECG parameters were analysed by using a standard method template for consistency between independent observers. Electrocardiograms from the recorders were compared by the following statistical methods: linear regression, Bland–Altman, receiver operator curve, and kappa analysis. There were 1015 patients recruited. The mean differences between recorders were small for PR, QRS, cardiac axis, with receiver operator analysis area under the curve (AUC) of >80%. Mean differences for QT and QTc (between recorders) were also small, with AUCs for QT leads of >75% and AUCs for QTc leads of >60%. Key findings from Bland–Altman analysis demonstrate overall an acceptable agreement with few outliers instances (<6%, Bland–Altman analysis). CONCLUSION: Several parameters recorded by the Kardia 6L (QT interval in all six leads, rhythm detection, PR interval, QRS duration, and cardiac axis) perform closely to the gold standard 12-lead ECG. However, that consistency weakens for left ventricular hypertrophy, QRS amplitudes (Lead I and AVL), and ischaemic changes. Oxford University Press 2021-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9707882/ /pubmed/36713105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztab083 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Original Articles
Azram, Mohammad
Ahmed, Noura
Leese, Lucy
Brigham, Matthew
Bowes, Robert
Wheatcroft, Stephen B
Ngantcha, Marcus
Stegemann, Berthold
Crowther, George
Tayebjee, Muzahir H
Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title_full Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title_fullStr Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title_full_unstemmed Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title_short Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)
title_sort clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (evalecg cardio)
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9707882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36713105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztab083
work_keys_str_mv AT azrammohammad clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT ahmednoura clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT leeselucy clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT brighammatthew clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT bowesrobert clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT wheatcroftstephenb clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT ngantchamarcus clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT stegemannberthold clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT crowthergeorge clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio
AT tayebjeemuzahirh clinicalvalidationandevaluationofanovelsixleadhandheldelectrocardiogramrecordercomparedtothe12leadelectrocardiograminunselectedcardiologypatientsevalecgcardio