AJCC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Critical Care. 2004;13: 228-234
Copyright © 2004 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Respond to This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Welinder, A.
Right arrow Articles by Pahlm, O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Welinder, A.
Right arrow Articles by Pahlm, O.

COMPARISON OF SIGNAL QUALITY BETWEEN EASI AND MASON-LIKAR 12-LEAD ELECTROCARDIOGRAMS DURING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

By Annika Welinder, MD, Leif Sörnmo, PhD, Dirk Q. Feild, MA, Charles L. Feldman, DSc, Jonas Pettersson, MD, PhD, Galen S. Wagner, MD and Olle Pahlm, MD, PhD. From the Department of Clinical Physiology, University Hospital, Lund, Sweden (AW, JP, OP); Department of Electroscience, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden (LS); Philips Medical Systems, Oxnard, Calif (DQF), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Mass (CLF), and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (GW).

• Background Myoelectric noise and baseline wander, artifacts that appear when patients move during electrocardiographic monitoring, can cause false alarms. This problem can be addressed by using a reduced lead set and placing electrodes on the anterior part of the torso only. The Mason-Likar modification of the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram and the EASI lead system are 2 alternative systems for lead placement.

• Objectives To test the hypothesis that the EASI lead system is less susceptible to artifacts than is the Mason-Likar modification of the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram.

• Methods Baseline wander and myoelectric noise amplitudes of EASI and Mason-Likar 12-lead electrocardiograms were compared. Twenty healthy volunteers participated. Both lead systems were recorded simultaneously for different types of physical activities. For each lead in each subject, baseline wander and myoelectric noise were measured for both systems, at rest and during each physical activity.

• Results The outcome for baseline wander was mixed. For myoelectric noise content, the EASI system performed better for the limb leads in the different physical activities. In the precordial leads, the differences were minimal or mixed. However, for supine-to-right turning, EASI performed worse than the Mason-Likar system.

• Conclusions The 2 systems have similar susceptibilities to baseline wander. The EASI system is, however, less susceptible to myoelectric noise than is the Mason-Likar system. EASI performed worse than Mason-Likar for turning supine to right, because only the EASI system uses an electrode in the right-midaxillary line.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.