Comparison of smartphone-based and standard base-apex electrocardiography in healthy dairy cows.
ECG
cow
iPhone
mobile
validation
Journal
Journal of veterinary internal medicine
ISSN: 1939-1676
Titre abrégé: J Vet Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8708660
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
16
05
2018
accepted:
16
11
2018
pubmed:
29
12
2018
medline:
30
4
2019
entrez:
29
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is good diagnostic accuracy of smartphone-based ECG in the evaluation of heart rate (HR), heart rhythm, and ECG values for humans, horses, dogs, and cats. Assess feasibility and reliability of a smartphone ECG device to evaluate HR expressed as beats per minute and ECG values in cows. Fifty-five healthy Holstein Friesian cows. Prospective observational study. A standard base-apex ECG was acquired for 60 seconds in each cow. A smartphone ECG tracing was recorded simultaneously using a single-lead bipolar ECG recorder. All ECGs were reviewed by 1 blinded investigator. The following ECG variables were assessed: HR, P wave duration, PR interval, QRS complex and QT interval (milliseconds), P wave, and QRS complex polarity. Agreement between standard and smartphone ECG was evaluated by Cohen's k test and the Bland-Altman test. Smartphone ECG tracings were interpretable in 89% of the recordings. Minimal differences of no clinical relevance were found between standard and smartphone ECG tracings regarding HR and duration of ECG waves and interval. Good agreement found in the evaluation of QRS complex polarity (85%) but not for P wave polarity (k = 0.006). Artifacts were rare but of significantly higher frequency in smartphone ECG compared to standard ECG tracings (22% versus 0%; P = .005). Good quality single-lead ECG tracings can be recorded by smartphone device in healthy cows. Smartphone tracings are reliable for evaluation of HR and selective ECG variables. Smartphone ECG can represent an additional tool for ECG screening in cows.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is good diagnostic accuracy of smartphone-based ECG in the evaluation of heart rate (HR), heart rhythm, and ECG values for humans, horses, dogs, and cats.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
Assess feasibility and reliability of a smartphone ECG device to evaluate HR expressed as beats per minute and ECG values in cows.
ANIMALS
METHODS
Fifty-five healthy Holstein Friesian cows.
METHODS
METHODS
Prospective observational study. A standard base-apex ECG was acquired for 60 seconds in each cow. A smartphone ECG tracing was recorded simultaneously using a single-lead bipolar ECG recorder. All ECGs were reviewed by 1 blinded investigator. The following ECG variables were assessed: HR, P wave duration, PR interval, QRS complex and QT interval (milliseconds), P wave, and QRS complex polarity. Agreement between standard and smartphone ECG was evaluated by Cohen's k test and the Bland-Altman test.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Smartphone ECG tracings were interpretable in 89% of the recordings. Minimal differences of no clinical relevance were found between standard and smartphone ECG tracings regarding HR and duration of ECG waves and interval. Good agreement found in the evaluation of QRS complex polarity (85%) but not for P wave polarity (k = 0.006). Artifacts were rare but of significantly higher frequency in smartphone ECG compared to standard ECG tracings (22% versus 0%; P = .005).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE
CONCLUSIONS
Good quality single-lead ECG tracings can be recorded by smartphone device in healthy cows. Smartphone tracings are reliable for evaluation of HR and selective ECG variables. Smartphone ECG can represent an additional tool for ECG screening in cows.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30592089
doi: 10.1111/jvim.15396
pmc: PMC6430901
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
981-986Informations de copyright
© 2018 The Authors. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine.
Références
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1983 Jun 15;182(12):1380-6
pubmed: 6874503
Vet Rec. 1997 Oct 4;141(14):352-7
pubmed: 9351181
Pediatr Cardiol. 2015 Oct;36(7):1452-7
pubmed: 25958154
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Oct 3;168(3):2897-8
pubmed: 23664442
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2014 Nov;21(2 Suppl):4-13
pubmed: 25354948
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2013 Jan;60(1):203-6
pubmed: 22868524
J Electrocardiol. 2015 Jan-Feb;48(1):1-7
pubmed: 25283739
Int J Clin Pharm. 2015 Dec;37(6):1111-20
pubmed: 26202627
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1990 Mar 15;196(6):894-6
pubmed: 2312388
Pediatr Cardiol. 2014 Apr;35(4):726-31
pubmed: 24259012
Heart Rhythm. 2013 Mar;10(3):315-9
pubmed: 23220686
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2016 Jul 15;249(2):189-94
pubmed: 27379594
J Electrocardiol. 2015 Mar-Apr;48(2):249-59
pubmed: 25601407
Vet J. 2016 Oct;216:33-7
pubmed: 27687923
Vet J. 2010 Jun;184(3):258-63
pubmed: 19734077
J Vet Intern Med. 2019 Mar;33(2):981-986
pubmed: 30592089
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Apr 30;165(1):193-4
pubmed: 23465249