Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32102049›Full record

Observational studyCritical pathways in cardiology2020

Actionable Ventricular Tachycardia During In-Hospital ECG Monitoring and Its Impact on Alarm Fatigue.

Michele M Pelter, Sukardi Suba, Cass Sandoval, Jessica K Zègre-Hemsey, Sarah Berger, Amy Larsen, Fabio Badilini, Xiao Hu

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Critical pathways in cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An annotated ventricular tachycardia (VT) alarm database: Toward a uniform standard for optimizing automated VT identification in hospitalized patients.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Michele M PelterFrom the University of California, San Francisco, School of Nursing.
Sukardi SubaFrom the University of California, San Francisco, School of Nursing.
Cass SandovalUniversity of California, San Francisco, Medical Center.
Jessica K Zègre-HemseyUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Nursing.
Sarah BergerUniversity of California, San Francisco, Medical Center.
Amy LarsenUniversity of California, San Francisco, Medical Center.
Fabio BadiliniFrom the University of California, San Francisco, School of Nursing.
Xiao HuDuke University School of Nursing.
University of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of California San Francisco Medical Center · USDuke University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Patient-reported Symptoms of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Prehospital Cardiac CareK23NR017896 · NINR · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ZEGRE-HEMSEY, JESSICA KATHLEEN · 2019 to 2021
$425k
NINR NIH HHS K23 NR017896
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVentricular tachycardia (V-tach) is the most common lethal arrhythmia, yet 90% of alarms are false and contribute to alarm fatigue. We hypothesize that some true V-tach also causes alarm fatigue because current criteria are too sensitive (i.e., ≥6 beats ≥100 beats/min [bpm]). PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine (1) the proportion of clinically actionable true V-tach events; (2) whether true actionable versus nonactionable V-tach differs in terms of heart rate and/or duration (seconds); and (3) if actionable V-tach is associated with adverse outcomes.

methodsThis was a secondary analysis in 460 intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Electronic health records were examined to determine if a V-tach event was actionable or nonactionable. Actionable V-tach was defined if a clinical action(s) was taken within 15 minutes of its occurrence (i.e., new and/or change of medication, defibrillation, and/or laboratory test). Maximal heart rate and duration for each V-tach event were measured from bedside monitor electrocardiography. Adverse patient outcomes included a code blue event and/or death.

resultsIn 460 ICU patients, 50 (11%) had 151 true V-tach events (range 1-20). Of the 50 patients, 40 (80%) had only nonactionable V-tach (97 events); 3 (6%) had both actionable and nonactionable V-tach (32 events); and 7 patients (14%) had only actionable V-tach (23 events). There were differences in duration comparing actionable versus nonactionable V-tach (mean 56.19 ± 116.87 seconds vs. 4.28 ± 4.09 seconds; P = 0.001) and maximal heart rate (188.81 ± 116.83 bpm vs. 150.79 ± 28.26 bpm; P = 0.001). Of the 50 patients, 3 (6%) had a code blue, 2 died, and all were in the actionable V-tach group.

conclusionsIn our sample, <1% experienced a code blue following true V-tach. Heart rate and duration for actionable V-tach were much faster and longer than that for nonactionable V-tach. Current default settings typically used for electrocardiographic monitoring (i.e., ≥6 beats ≥100 bpm) appear to be too conservative and can lead to crisis/red level nuisance alarms that contribute to alarm fatigue. A prospective study designed to test whether adjusting default settings to these higher levels is safe for patients is needed.

Indexed as

Alert Fatigue, Health PersonnelHospital MortalityAdultAgedCardiopulmonary ResuscitationClinical AlarmsElectrocardiographyFemaleHeart RateHospitalizationHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicTachycardia, Ventricular

Identifiers

PMID32102049
PMCPMC7413570
OpenAlexW3008197584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.