Literature DB >> 32414909

Comparison between smartphone electrocardiography and standard three-lead base apex electrocardiography in healthy horses.

Brittany Welch-Huston1, Sian Durward-Akhurst2, Elaine Norton1, Lacey Ellingson3, Aaron Rendahl3, Molly McCue1.   

Abstract

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. © British Veterinary Association 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiology; electrocardiology; horses; internal medicine

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32414909      PMCID: PMC7606555          DOI: 10.1136/vr.105759

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Rec        ISSN: 0042-4900            Impact factor:   2.695


  15 in total

1.  Smartphone applications (apps) for heart rate measurement in children: comparison with electrocardiography monitor.

Authors:  Chi-Lin Ho; Yun-Ching Fu; Ming-Chih Lin; Sheng-Ching Chan; Betau Hwang; Sheng-Ling Jan
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 1.655

2.  The future of smartphones in health care.

Authors:  Michael A Batista; Shiv M Gaglani
Journal:  Virtual Mentor       Date:  2013-11-01

Review 3.  Acquisition and analysis of cardiovascular signals on smartphones: potential, pitfalls and perspectives: by the Task Force of the e-Cardiology Working Group of European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Nico Bruining; Enrico Caiani; Catherine Chronaki; Przemyslaw Guzik; Enno van der Velde
Journal:  Eur J Prev Cardiol       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 7.804

4.  Occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias in Standardbred racehorses.

Authors:  J Slack; R C Boston; L R Soma; V B Reef
Journal:  Equine Vet J       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 2.888

5.  Sudden death in training and racing Thoroughbred horses.

Authors:  H B Gelberg; J F Zachary; J I Everitt; R C Jensen; D L Smetzer
Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc       Date:  1985-12-15       Impact factor: 1.936

6.  Response by Halcox and Wareham to Letter Regarding Article, "Assessment of Remote Heart Rhythm Sampling Using the AliveCor Heart Monitor to Screen for Atrial Fibrillation: The REHEARSE-AF Study".

Authors:  Julian P J Halcox; Kathie Wareham
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Diagnostic accuracy of a smartphone electrocardiograph in dogs: Comparison with standard 6-lead electrocardiography.

Authors:  T Vezzosi; C Buralli; F Marchesotti; F Porporato; R Tognetti; E Zini; O Domenech
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 2.688

8.  Comparison of QT Interval Readings in Normal Sinus Rhythm Between a Smartphone Heart Monitor and a 12-Lead ECG for Healthy Volunteers and Inpatients Receiving Sotalol or Dofetilide.

Authors:  Paul Garabelli; Stavros Stavrakis; Michael Albert; Edward Koomson; Purvi Parwani; Jawad Chohan; Landgrave Smith; David Albert; Rongsheng Xie; Qiying Xie; Dwight Reynolds; Sunny Po
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-04-29

9.  Detection of heart rate and rhythm with a smartphone-based electrocardiograph versus a reference standard electrocardiograph in dogs and cats.

Authors:  Marc S Kraus; Anna R Gelzer; Mark Rishniw
Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 1.936

Review 10.  Recommendations for management of equine athletes with cardiovascular abnormalities.

Authors:  V B Reef; J Bonagura; R Buhl; M K J McGurrin; C C Schwarzwald; G van Loon; L E Young
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 3.333

View more
  1 in total

1.  Evaluation of a new portable 1-lead digital cardiac monitor (eKuore) compared with standard base-apex electrocardiography in healthy horses.

Authors:  Valentina Vitale; Tommaso Vezzosi; Rosalba Tognetti; Carlotta Fraschetti; Micaela Sgorbini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.