ArticlePloS one2025
Prevalence and risk factors of developing cardiac arrhythmia in patients presenting to the emergency department with electrical injuries.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac arrhythmias following electrical shocks are significant concerns in emergency medicine, yet predictive factors remain unclear.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of cardiac arrhythmias in patients presenting with electrical injuries to the emergency department.
methodsIn this retrospective study conducted between January 2019 and December 2023, we analysed 189 patients aged ≥18 years who presented with electrical injuries. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not they developed an arrhythmia. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and laboratory parameters were compared between groups.
resultsCardiac arrhythmia developed in 21.2% (n = 40) of patients. The arrhythmia group showed significantly higher mean age (32.4 ± 16.7 vs 26.5 ± 14.8 years, p = 0.023) and high-voltage exposure rates (≥1000 V) (p = 0.015). Multivariate analysis identified age (OR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05), CK > 850 U/L (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.17-1.81), troponin >250 ng/mL (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.09-1.72), lactate >2.1 mmol/L (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.67-5.91), and high voltage (OR: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.64-5.39) as independent risk factors. ROC analysis showed high voltage (AUC: 0.804) as the strongest predictor of developing arrhythmia.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that high voltage exposure, advanced age, and elevated biomarkers are significant predictors of developing arrhythmia in patients with electrical injuries. These findings may guide clinical decision-making regarding cardiac monitoring in the emergency department.
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.