ArticleCJEM2022
Diagnosis and management of wide complex tachycardia in the emergency department.
Article in CJEM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile wide complex tachycardia (WCT) is potentially lethal, little is known about its incidence in the ED or about expertise of ED physicians in diagnosing and treating it. We sought to compare WCT ED cases that were primary arrhythmias versus those with rapid heart rate secondary to medical issues, as well as the accuracy of ED diagnosis and appropriateness of treatment.
methodsWe conducted a health records review at a large academic hospital ED staffed by 95 physicians and included consecutive patients over 28 months (2018-2020) with WCT (heart rate ≥ 120 bpm and QRS ≥ 120 ms). Cases were adjudicated for the accuracy of ECG diagnosis versus the cardiology read and for correctness of treatment as per guidelines by two ED physicians and one cardiologist.
resultsWe identified 306 eligible cases (0.2% of all ED visits): mean age 73.9 years, male 66.0%, admitted 53.3%, died in ED 2.3%. Primary arrhythmias and secondary tachycardias were each 50.0% (95% CI 44.4-55.6%). ED physicians correctly interpreted 81.2% of ECGs. The most common presenting arrythmias and % correct were: atrial fibrillation 42.7% (95.0%), atrial flutter 22.2% (63.5%), sinus tachycardia 12.0% (78.6%), and supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) 11.1% (68.0%). Treatments were judged optimal in 84.3% of primary WCT and 86.9% in secondary WCT. Treatments were suboptimal for: inappropriate drug (3.9% for primary versus 1.3% for secondary), failure to reduce heart rate < 100 prior to discharge home (9.1% for primary versus 34.4% for secondary), and not treating the underlying cause in 5.9% of secondary WCT.
conclusionsWCT cases were evenly split between primary arrhythmias and secondary cases. ED physicians interpreted the ECG correctly in 81% but over-called atrial flutter and SVT. They implemented appropriate care in most cases but sometimes failed to adequately control heart rate or to treat the underlying condition, suggesting opportunities to improve care of WCT in the ED.
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.