The Veterinary record · 2020
Comparison between smartphone electrocardiography and standard three-lead base apex electrocardiography in healthy horses.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Welch-Huston Brittany, Durward-Akhurst Sian, Norton Elaine, Ellingson Lacey, Rendahl Aaron, McCue Molly
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrhythmias are commonly auscultated during routine physical examinations in horses and determining the underlying electrical abnormality using an ECG is important. The most commonly used device is a three-lead base apex system (Televet), however few practitioners carry this for routine visits. With recognition of the utility of smartphone-based ECGs in humans, dogs and ruminants, the AliveCor single-lead bipolar smartphone-based ECG has gained popularity. The objective of this study was to determine if AliveCor and Televet ECG measurements were comparable in healthy horses using multiple observers.
METHODS: ECGs were performed on 15 healthy horses simultaneously using the AliveCor and Televet.
RESULTS: There was very good to perfect interdevice and interobserver agreement for heart rate and RR interval measurement, and moderate-to-good interdevice and interobserver agreement for detection of non-pathological arrhythmias. Interdevice agreement for measurement of P-wave and QRS duration, QT, PR and T-peak to T-end interval was poor to fair. Interestingly, interobserver agreement for P-wave and QRS duration, QT, PR, and T-peak to T-end interval measurements was fair to good.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the AliveCor is comparable to the Televet for heart rate and RR measurement, and for the detection of non-pathogenic arrhythmias with acceptable agreement between observers.
METHODS: ECGs were performed on 15 healthy horses simultaneously using the AliveCor and Televet.
RESULTS: There was very good to perfect interdevice and interobserver agreement for heart rate and RR interval measurement, and moderate-to-good interdevice and interobserver agreement for detection of non-pathological arrhythmias. Interdevice agreement for measurement of P-wave and QRS duration, QT, PR and T-peak to T-end interval was poor to fair. Interestingly, interobserver agreement for P-wave and QRS duration, QT, PR, and T-peak to T-end interval measurements was fair to good.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the AliveCor is comparable to the Televet for heart rate and RR measurement, and for the detection of non-pathogenic arrhythmias with acceptable agreement between observers.