ArticleCritical care explorations2022
Detection of Hemodynamic Status Using an Analytic Based on an Electrocardiogram Lead Waveform.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep Learning and Noninvasive Sensors for Detecting Physiological Dysregulation: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Review
- Use of a continuous single lead electrocardiogram analytic to predict patient deterioration requiring rapid response team activation.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Impact of emergency department-based intensive care unit on outcomes of decompensating boarding emergency department patients.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2023Article
- Prediction of episode of hemodynamic instability using an electrocardiogram based analytic: a retrospective cohort study.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDelayed identification of hemodynamic deterioration remains a persistent issue for in-hospital patient care. Clinicians continue to rely on vital signs associated with tachycardia and hypotension to identify hemodynamically unstable patients. A novel, noninvasive technology, the Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability (AHI), uses only the continuous electrocardiogram (ECG) signal from a typical hospital multiparameter telemetry monitor to monitor hemodynamics. The intent of this study was to determine if AHI is able to predict hemodynamic instability without the need for continuous direct measurement of blood pressure.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingSingle quaternary care academic health system in Michigan. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adult patients between November 2019 and February 2020 undergoing continuous ECG and intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring in an intensive care setting.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsOne million two hundred fifty-two thousand seven hundred forty-two 5-minute windows of the analytic output were analyzed from 597 consecutive adult patients. AHI outputs were compared with vital sign indications of hemodynamic instability (heart rate > 100 beats/min, systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg, and shock index of > 1) in the same window. The observed sensitivity and specificity of AHI were 96.9% and 79.0%, respectively, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 for heart rate and systolic blood pressure. For the shock index analysis, AHI's sensitivity was 72.0% and specificity was 80.3% with an AUC of 0.81.
conclusionsThe AHI-derived hemodynamic status appropriately detected the various gold standard indications of hemodynamic instability (hypotension, tachycardia and hypotension, and shock index > 1). AHI may provide continuous dynamic hemodynamic monitoring capabilities in patients who traditionally have intermittent static vital sign measurements.
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.