Abstract-The goals of electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring in hospital settings have expanded from simple heart rate and basic rhythm determination to the diagnosis of complex arrhythmias, myocardial ischemia, and prolonged QT interval. Whereas computerized arrhythmia analysis is automatic in cardiac monitoring systems, computerized ST-segment ischemia analysis is available only in newer-generation monitors, and computerized QT-interval monitoring is currently unavailable. Even in hospitals with ST-monitoring capability, ischemia monitoring is vastly underutilized by healthcare professionals. Moreover, because no computerized analysis is available for QT monitoring, healthcare professionals must determine when it is appropriate to manually measure QT intervals (eg, when a patient is started on a potentially proarrhythmic drug). The purpose of the present review is to provide 'best practices' for hospital ECG monitoring. Randomized clinical trials in this area are almost nonexistent; therefore, expert opinions are based upon clinical experience and related research in the field of electrocardiography. This consensus document encompasses all areas of hospital cardiac monitoring in both children and adults. The emphasis is on information clinicians need to know to monitor patients safely and effectively. Recommendations are made with regard to indications, timeframes, and strategies to improve the diagnostic accuracy of cardiac arrhythmia, ischemia, and QT-interval monitoring. Currently available ECG lead systems are described, and recommendations related to staffing, training, and methods to improve quality are provided. Key Words: AHA Scientific Statements Ⅲ pediatrics Ⅲ electrocardiography Ⅲ torsade de pointes Ⅲ myocardial infarction Ⅲ tachyarrhythmias Ⅲ ischemia Ⅲ antiarrhythmic agents Ⅲ long-QT syndrome S ince the introduction of electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring in hospital units Ͼ40 years ago, 1 the goals of monitoring have expanded from simple tracking of heart rate and basic rhythm to the diagnosis of complex arrhythmias, the detection of myocardial ischemia, and the identification of a prolonged QT interval. During the same 4 decades, major improvements have occurred in cardiac monitoring systems, including computerized arrhythmia detection algorithms, STsegment/ischemia monitoring software, improved noisereduction strategies, multilead monitoring, and reduced lead sets for monitoring-derived 12-lead ECGs with a minimal number of electrodes. 2,3 Despite these advances in technology, the need for human oversight in the interpretation of ECG monitoring data is as important today as it was 40 years ago for the following reasons. First, cardiac monitor algorithms are intentionally set for high sensitivity at the expense of specificity. As a result, numerous false alarms occur that must be evaluated by healthcare professionals so that overtreatment of patients will not occur. Examples of overtreatment are reported in the The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential ...

Background and Purpose: This scientific statement provides an interprofessional, comprehensive review of evidence and recommendations for indications, duration, and implementation of continuous electro cardiographic monitoring of hospitalized patients. Since the original practice standards were published in 2004, new issues have emerged that need to be addressed: overuse of arrhythmia monitoring among a variety of patient populations, appropriate use of ischemia and QT-interval monitoring among select populations, alarm management, and documentation in electronic health records. Methods: Authors were commissioned by the American Heart Association and included experts from general cardiology, electrophysiology (adult and pediatric), and interventional cardiology, as well as a hospitalist and experts in alarm management. Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Authors were assigned topics relevant to their areas of expertise, reviewed the literature with an emphasis on publications since the prior practice standards, and drafted recommendations on indications and duration for electrocardiographic monitoring in accordance with the American Heart Association Level of Evidence grading algorithm that was in place at the time of commissioning. Results: The comprehensive document is grouped into 5 sections: (1) Overview of Arrhythmia, Ischemia, and QTc Monitoring; (2) Recommendations for Indication and Duration of Electrocardiographic Monitoring presented by patient population; (3) Organizational Aspects: Alarm Management, Education of Staff, and Documentation; (4) Implementation of Practice Standards; and (5) Call for Research. Conclusions: Many of the recommendations are based on limited data, so authors conclude with specific questions for further research.

No abstract

No abstract

Although the American Heart Association recommends a prehospital electrocardiogram (ECG) be recorded for all patients who access the emergency medical system with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), widespread use of prehospital ECG has not been achieved in the United States. A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted in a predominately rural county in northern California to test a simple strategy for acquiring and transmitting prehospital ECGs that involved minimal paramedic training and decision making. A 12-lead ECG was synthesized from 5 electrodes and continuous ST-segment monitoring was performed with ST-event ECGs automatically transmitted to the destination hospital emergency department. Patients randomized to the experimental group had their ECGs printed out in the emergency department with an audible voice alarm, whereas control patients had an ECG after hospital arrival, as was the standard of care in the county. The result was that nearly 3/4 (74%) of 4,219 patients with symptoms of ACS over the 4-year study enrollment period had a prehospital ECG. Mean time from 911 call to first ECG was 20 minutes in those with a prehospital ECG versus 79 minutes in those without a prehospital ECG (p <0.0001). Mean paramedic scene time in patients with a prehospital ECG was just 2 minutes longer than in those without a prehospital ECG (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 3.6, p <0.001). Patients with non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris had a faster time to first intravenous drug and there was a suggested trend for a faster door-to-balloon time and lower risk of mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. In conclusion, increased paramedic use of prehospital ECGs and decreased hospital treatment times for ACS are feasible with a simple approach tailored to characteristics of a local geographic region.