Cardiology journal · 2018
TBC: A simple algorithm to rule out abnormalities in electrocardiograms of patients with pacemakers.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Higueras Javier, Olmos Carmen, Palacios-Rubio Julián, Gómez-Polo Juan Carlos, Martínez-Losas Pedro, Ruiz-Pizarro Virginia, Bover Ramón, Pérez-Villacastín Julián
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to create a straightforward method to rule out abnormalities in electrocardiograms (ECGs) performed in patients with pacemakers.
METHODS: The TBC method screens the ECG for any of the following findings: Tachycardia with pacing spikes, Bradycardia without spikes and Chaos with spikes unrelated to QRS-T complexes. T was considered to advise for patient assessment and B and C to require referral for urgent pacemaker evaluation. The diagnostic accuracy of the algorithm was validated using a cohort of 151 ECGs with normal and dysfunctional pacemakers. The effect of the algorithm was then evaluated for diagnostic skills and management of patients with pacemakers by non-cardiologists, comparing their diagnostic accuracy before and after teaching the algorithm.
RESULTS: The TBC algorithm had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 94% in diagnosing a malfunctioning pacemaker. The diagnostic skills and patient referral were significantly improved (74.8% vs. 89.5%, p < 0.001; and 57.4% vs. 83%, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: TBC is an easy to remember and apply method to rule out severe abnormalities in ECGs of patients with pacemakers. TBC algorithm has a very good diagnostic capability and is easily applied by non-expert physicians with good results.
METHODS: The TBC method screens the ECG for any of the following findings: Tachycardia with pacing spikes, Bradycardia without spikes and Chaos with spikes unrelated to QRS-T complexes. T was considered to advise for patient assessment and B and C to require referral for urgent pacemaker evaluation. The diagnostic accuracy of the algorithm was validated using a cohort of 151 ECGs with normal and dysfunctional pacemakers. The effect of the algorithm was then evaluated for diagnostic skills and management of patients with pacemakers by non-cardiologists, comparing their diagnostic accuracy before and after teaching the algorithm.
RESULTS: The TBC algorithm had a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 94% in diagnosing a malfunctioning pacemaker. The diagnostic skills and patient referral were significantly improved (74.8% vs. 89.5%, p < 0.001; and 57.4% vs. 83%, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: TBC is an easy to remember and apply method to rule out severe abnormalities in ECGs of patients with pacemakers. TBC algorithm has a very good diagnostic capability and is easily applied by non-expert physicians with good results.