ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2019
A Comparative Study of the Validity and Reliability of Two Wireless Telemetry Electrocardiogram Devices in the Emergency Medicine Department.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to compare the clinical validity and reliability of two wireless telemetry electrocardiogram (ECG) devices in the Emergency Medicine Department. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients who attended the Emergency Medicine Department underwent wireless telemetry ECG testing (N=245) using the Infron Micro Cor and the Nihon Kohden Cardiofax M 1350 K devices. ECG recordings included heart rate, P-wave amplitude, PR segment length, QRS duration, QT and QTc intervals, ST depression and elevation, the number of ECG artifacts, the ECG diagnosis, and duration. Statistical analysis of reliability included the use of Cohen's kappa (κ) values. RESULTS One hundred women (40.8%) and 145 men (59.2%) were included in the study. The duration for the Infron Micro Cor ECG readings (57.5±0.93 seconds) was significantly shorter compared with the Nihon Kohden Cardiofax M ECG readings (65.2±9.72 seconds) (p=0.0001). The Infron Micro Cor ECG readings contained significantly more lead artifacts (93 or 37.9%) compared with the Nihon Kohden ECG readings (71 or 28.9%) (p=0.01). There was no difference between the two devices in terms of the other ECG parameters. The compatibility of ST-segment elevation detection was found to be almost in complete agreement between the Infron Micro Cor and Nihon Kohden Cardiofax M ECG devices, as determined by the k-values for ST elevation and ST depression. CONCLUSIONS Two wireless telemetry ECG devices were found to be reliable for use in the Emergency Medicine Department. The Infron Micro Cor wireless telemetry ECG device provided more rapid results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.