Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38046790›Full record

ArticleBritish paramedic journal2023

Low-voltage electrical injuries and the electrocardiogram: is a 'normal' electrocardiogram sufficient for safe discharge from care? A systematic review.

Simon Corrall, Samantha Laws, Alan Rice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British paramedic journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Simon CorrallLymington Urgent Treatment Centre.
Samantha LawsSt. George's, University of London.
Alan RiceNorth Shropshire PCN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The current Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee guidelines in the United Kingdom provide clear national guidance for low-voltage electrical injury patients. While patients can be considered safe to discharge with an apparently 'normal' initial electrocardiogram (ECG), some evidence questions the safety profile of these patients with a risk of a 'delayed arrhythmia'. This review aims to examine this as well as identifying the frequency and common arrhythmias that require patients to be conveyed to hospital for further monitoring post electrical injury. It will also aim to improve the understanding of potentially clinically significant arrhythmias that may require clinical intervention or even admission within an in-hospital environment. Methods: A systematic review using three electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, AMED) was conducted in January 2022. A preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was used to identify relevant studies with a suitable quality to support a critical review of the topic. A modified Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment checklist was used across suitable studies and a descriptive statistics approach was adopted to present the findings. Results: Seven studies, largely retrospective reviews, met the inclusion criteria. The findings showed 26% of patients had an arrhythmia on initial presentation (n = 364/1234) with incidences of sinus tachycardia, sinus bradycardia and premature ventricular contractions. However, making definitive statements is challenging due to the lack of access to individual patients' past ECGs. Within these arrhythmias' ST segment changes, atrial fibrillation and long QT syndrome could be considered potentially significant, however associated prognosis with these and electrical injuries is unknown. Only six (0.5%) patients required treatment by drug therapy, and a further three died from associated complications. Most patients with a normal ECG were discharged immediately with only a limited follow-up. No presentation of a 'delayed arrhythmia' was identified throughout the studies. Conclusion: The data for low-voltage electrical injuries are limited, but the potential arrhythmias for this patient group seldom require intervention. The entity of the 'delayed arrhythmia' may not be a reason to admit or monitor patients for prolonged periods. Further studies should consider the safety profile of discharging a patient with a normal ECG.

Indexed as

arrhythmiaelectrical injuryelectrocardiogram

Identifiers

PMID38046790
PMCPMC10690487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.