BACKGROUND: Commonly used techniques for QT measurement that identify T wave end using amplitude thresholds or the tangent method are sensitive to baseline drift and to variations of terminal T wave shape. Such QT measurement techniques commonly underestimate or overestimate the "true" QT interval. METHODS: To find the end of the T wave, the new Philips QT interval measurement algorithms use the distance from an ancillary line drawn from the peak of the T wave to a point beyond the expected inflection point at the end of the T wave. We have adapted and optimized modifications of this basic approach for use in three different ECG application areas: resting diagnostic, ambulatory Holter, and in-hospital patient monitoring. The Philips DXL resting diagnostic algorithm uses an alpha-trimming technique and a measure of central tendency to determine the median QT value of eight most reliable leads. In ambulatory Holter ECG analysis, generally only two or three channels are available. QT is measured on a root-mean-square vector magnitude signal. Finally, QT measurement in the real time in-hospital application is among the most challenging areas of QT measurement. The Philips real time QT interval measurement algorithm employs features from both Philips DXL 12-lead and ambulatory Holter QT algorithms with further enhancements. RESULTS: The diagnostic 12-lead algorithm has been tested against the gold standard measurement database established by the CSE group with results surpassing the industrial ECG measurement accuracy standards. Holter and monitoring algorithm performance data on the PhysioNet QT database were shown to be similar to the manual measurements by two cardiologists. CONCLUSION: The three variations of the QT measurement algorithm we developed are suitable for diagnostic 12-lead, Holter, and patient monitoring applications.
BACKGROUND: Commonly used techniques for QT measurement that identify T wave end using amplitude thresholds or the tangent method are sensitive to baseline drift and to variations of terminal T wave shape. Such QT measurement techniques commonly underestimate or overestimate the "true" QT interval. METHODS: To find the end of the T wave, the new Philips QT interval measurement algorithms use the distance from an ancillary line drawn from the peak of the T wave to a point beyond the expected inflection point at the end of the T wave. We have adapted and optimized modifications of this basic approach for use in three different ECG application areas: resting diagnostic, ambulatory Holter, and in-hospital patient monitoring. The Philips DXL resting diagnostic algorithm uses an alpha-trimming technique and a measure of central tendency to determine the median QT value of eight most reliable leads. In ambulatory Holter ECG analysis, generally only two or three channels are available. QT is measured on a root-mean-square vector magnitude signal. Finally, QT measurement in the real time in-hospital application is among the most challenging areas of QT measurement. The Philips real time QT interval measurement algorithm employs features from both Philips DXL 12-lead and ambulatory Holter QT algorithms with further enhancements. RESULTS: The diagnostic 12-lead algorithm has been tested against the gold standard measurement database established by the CSE group with results surpassing the industrial ECG measurement accuracy standards. Holter and monitoring algorithm performance data on the PhysioNet QT database were shown to be similar to the manual measurements by two cardiologists. CONCLUSION: The three variations of the QT measurement algorithm we developed are suitable for diagnostic 12-lead, Holter, and patient monitoring applications.
Authors: Paul Kligfield; E William Hancock; Eric D Helfenbein; Emilie J Dawson; Melynda A Cook; James M Lindauer; Sophia H Zhou; Joel Xue Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2006-05-06 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Eric D Helfenbein; Sophia H Zhou; James M Lindauer; Dirk Q Field; Richard E Gregg; John J Wang; Scott S Kresge; Francis P Michaud Journal: J Electrocardiol Date: 2006-08-21 Impact factor: 1.438
Authors: Eric D Helfenbein; Michael J Ackerman; Pentti M Rautaharju; Sophia H Zhou; Richard E Gregg; James M Lindauer; David Miller; John J Wang; Scott S Kresge; Saeed Babaeizadeh; Dirk Q Feild; Francis P Michaud Journal: J Electrocardiol Date: 2007 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.438
Authors: Nenad Sarapa; Joel Morganroth; Jean-Philippe Couderc; Steven F Francom; Borje Darpo; Joseph C Fleishaker; Janet D McEnroe; William T Chen; Wojciech Zareba; Arthur J Moss Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Daniel J Pelchovitz; Jason Ng; Alexandru B Chicos; Daniel W Bergner; Jeffrey J Goldberger Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Andrea H Ramirez; Jonathan S Schildcrout; Dana L Blakemore; Dan R Masys; Jill M Pulley; Melissa A Basford; Dan M Roden; Joshua C Denny Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Ching-Hui Sia; Mayank Dalakoti; Benjamin Y Q Tan; Edward C Y Lee; Xiayan Shen; Kangjie Wang; Joshua S Lee; Shalini Arulanandam; Weien Chow; Tee Joo Yeo; Khung Keong Yeo; Terrance S J Chua; Ru San Tan; Carolyn S P Lam; Daniel T T Chong Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Christopher V Desimone; J Martijn Bos; Katy M Bos; Jackson J Liang; Nikhil A Patel; David O Hodge; Amit Noheria; Samuel J Asirvatham; Michael J Ackerman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2015-02-08
Authors: Georges Ephrem; Michael Levine; Patricia Friedmann; Paul Schweitzer Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2012-11-22 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Timothy J B Ulrich; Marc A Ellsworth; William A Carey; Adeel S Zubair; Brianna C MacQueen; Christopher E Colby; Michael J Ackerman Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2014-06-04 Impact factor: 1.655