Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation
Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations we...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-11-01
|
| Series: | Children |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/8/12/1092 |
| _version_ | 1797505885243703296 |
|---|---|
| author | Siren Rettedal Joar Eilevstjønn Amalie Kibsgaard Jan Terje Kvaløy Hege Ersdal |
| author_facet | Siren Rettedal Joar Eilevstjønn Amalie Kibsgaard Jan Terje Kvaløy Hege Ersdal |
| author_sort | Siren Rettedal |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations were video recorded, and HR was registered every second. Results: Device placement time from birth was median (quartiles) 6 (4, 18) seconds for NeoBeat versus 138 (97, 181) seconds for ECG and 152 (103, 216) seconds for PO. Time to first HR presentation from birth was 22 (13, 45) seconds for NeoBeat versus 171 (129, 239) seconds for ECG and 270 (185, 357) seconds for PO. Proportion of time with HR feedback from NeoBeat during resuscitation from birth was 85 (69, 93)%, from arrival at the resuscitation table 98 (85, 100)%, and during positive pressure ventilation 100 (95, 100)%. For ECG, these proportions were, 25 (0, 43)%, 28 (0, 56)%, and 33 (0, 66)% and for PO, 0 (0, 16)%, 0 (0, 16)%, and 0 (0, 18)%. All <i>p</i> < 0.0001. Conclusions: NeoBeat was faster to place, presented HR more rapidly, and provided feedback on HR for a larger proportion of time during ongoing resuscitation compared to 3-lead ECG and PO. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T04:24:43Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5acdf162d814476fa9dfbd0e5bf86419 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2227-9067 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T04:24:43Z |
| publishDate | 2021-11-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Children |
| spelling | doaj.art-5acdf162d814476fa9dfbd0e5bf864192023-11-23T07:41:51ZengMDPI AGChildren2227-90672021-11-01812109210.3390/children8121092Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn ResuscitationSiren Rettedal0Joar Eilevstjønn1Amalie Kibsgaard2Jan Terje Kvaløy3Hege Ersdal4Department of Paediatrics, Stavanger University Hospital, 4011 Stavanger, NorwayLaerdal Medical, 4002 Stavanger, NorwayDepartment of Paediatrics, Stavanger University Hospital, 4011 Stavanger, NorwayDepartment of Research, Section of Biostatistics, Stavanger University Hospital, 4011 Stavanger, NorwayFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, 4021 Stavanger, NorwayBackground: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking. Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations were video recorded, and HR was registered every second. Results: Device placement time from birth was median (quartiles) 6 (4, 18) seconds for NeoBeat versus 138 (97, 181) seconds for ECG and 152 (103, 216) seconds for PO. Time to first HR presentation from birth was 22 (13, 45) seconds for NeoBeat versus 171 (129, 239) seconds for ECG and 270 (185, 357) seconds for PO. Proportion of time with HR feedback from NeoBeat during resuscitation from birth was 85 (69, 93)%, from arrival at the resuscitation table 98 (85, 100)%, and during positive pressure ventilation 100 (95, 100)%. For ECG, these proportions were, 25 (0, 43)%, 28 (0, 56)%, and 33 (0, 66)% and for PO, 0 (0, 16)%, 0 (0, 16)%, and 0 (0, 18)%. All <i>p</i> < 0.0001. Conclusions: NeoBeat was faster to place, presented HR more rapidly, and provided feedback on HR for a larger proportion of time during ongoing resuscitation compared to 3-lead ECG and PO.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/8/12/1092NeoBeatheart rate monitoringPulse Oximetrynewborn resuscitationECGdry-electrode technology |
| spellingShingle | Siren Rettedal Joar Eilevstjønn Amalie Kibsgaard Jan Terje Kvaløy Hege Ersdal Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation Children NeoBeat heart rate monitoring Pulse Oximetry newborn resuscitation ECG dry-electrode technology |
| title | Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation |
| title_full | Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation |
| title_short | Comparison of Heart Rate Feedback from Dry-Electrode ECG, 3-Lead ECG, and Pulse Oximetry during Newborn Resuscitation |
| title_sort | comparison of heart rate feedback from dry electrode ecg 3 lead ecg and pulse oximetry during newborn resuscitation |
| topic | NeoBeat heart rate monitoring Pulse Oximetry newborn resuscitation ECG dry-electrode technology |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/8/12/1092 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sirenrettedal comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation AT joareilevstjønn comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation AT amaliekibsgaard comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation AT janterjekvaløy comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation AT hegeersdal comparisonofheartratefeedbackfromdryelectrodeecg3leadecgandpulseoximetryduringnewbornresuscitation |