ArticleJournal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives2020
'Utilization of telemetry monitoring for non-cardiac conditions in non-critical patients: what are the trends and perceptions amongst medical residents?'
Article in Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives, 2020. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
objectiveCurrent evidence shows that telemetry monitoring is commonly overutilized for '
methodsAll the residents undergoing internal medicine training at a community hospital were surveyed with the help of a questionnaire regarding the utility of telemetry in
resultsSurvey was completed by 37 residents. Analysis of the responses showed that despite the frequent use of telemetry in non-cardiac conditions, majority of the medical residents are unaware of the correct indications. Seventy-three percent choose 'continuous' telemetry when placing the order while only 16% (often or always) discontinue telemetry after 24 hours of uneventful use. Although 84% residents admitted that telemetry is overutilized, still 49% felt that it leads to better patient care while 70% considered it superior to frequent vitals monitoring for early detection of hemodynamic instability. Possible causes of inappropriate use included 'Lack of knowledge about the related literature' and 'Following trends set by the peers'.
conclusionMajority of the medical residents overutilize telemetry in non-cardiac conditions due to lack of knowledge, perceived sense of security and inappropriate trends set by their colleagues. In order to abolish these tendencies, we propose the provision of adequate educational resources to the clinical staff at every level along with other system-based strategies.
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.