{"title":"根据美国心脏协会实践标准对住院患者进行心律失常遥测监测的适当性和结果--一项多中心研究。","authors":"Marianne Sætrang Holm , Nina Fålun , Trond Røed Pettersen , Bjørn Bendz , Roy Miodini Nilsen , Jørund Langørgen , Alf Inge Larsen , Marianne Laastad Sørensen , Kristin E. Sandau , Tone Merete Norekvål","doi":"10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.07.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>To the best of our knowledge, no prospective research studies have compared clinical practice to the American Heart Association (AHA) updated practice standards for in-hospital telemetry monitoring.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Our aims were therefore (1) to investigate how patients were assigned to telemetry monitoring in accordance with the AHA's updated practice standards, (2) to determine the number and type of arrhythmic events, and (3) to describe subsequent changes in clinical management.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This prospective multicenter study included 1154 patients at three university hospitals in Norway. Data were collected 24/7 over a four-week period, with follow-up measurements from telemetry admission until hospital discharge.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of patients assigned to telemetry, 67 % (<em>n</em> = 767) met practice standards, corresponding to AHA Class I or II. Patients were predominantly men (65 %, <em>n</em> = 748), and the mean age was 65 years (SD ±16). The study included both patients with cardiac and non-cardiac diagnoses from various medical and surgical departments throughout the hospitals. Ninety-one percent of the patients in Class III were monitored based on indications that were reclassified from Class II to Class III (not indicated) in the updated practice standards (patients admitted with chest pain or post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without complications). Overall, arrhythmic events occurred in 37 % (<em>n</em> = 424) of patients, and they occurred in all classes. Eighteen percent (<em>n</em> = 59) of arrhythmic events occurred in Class III. Of all arrhythmias, 3 % (<em>n</em> = 14) were life threatening, and all of them occurring within Class I. Telemetry monitoring led to changes in clinical management in 22 % (<em>n</em> = 257) of patients due to clinical alarms, of which 71 % (<em>n</em> = 182) were related to medication management.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Most patients were appropriately monitored according to the AHA practice standards, meeting Class I and II. Arrhythmias occurred in all classes, but life-threatening arrhythmias only occurred in patients in Class I. However, a daily re-assessment of each patient's telemetry indication is warranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55064,"journal":{"name":"Heart & Lung","volume":"68 ","pages":"Pages 217-226"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014795632400133X/pdfft?md5=b5abf060d4e398207cb09a8157a7e5d3&pid=1-s2.0-S014795632400133X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appropriateness and outcomes of hospitalized patients telemetry monitored for cardiac arrhythmias in accordance with the American Heart Association Practice Standards–A multicenter study\",\"authors\":\"Marianne Sætrang Holm , Nina Fålun , Trond Røed Pettersen , Bjørn Bendz , Roy Miodini Nilsen , Jørund Langørgen , Alf Inge Larsen , Marianne Laastad Sørensen , Kristin E. Sandau , Tone Merete Norekvål\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.07.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>To the best of our knowledge, no prospective research studies have compared clinical practice to the American Heart Association (AHA) updated practice standards for in-hospital telemetry monitoring.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Our aims were therefore (1) to investigate how patients were assigned to telemetry monitoring in accordance with the AHA's updated practice standards, (2) to determine the number and type of arrhythmic events, and (3) to describe subsequent changes in clinical management.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This prospective multicenter study included 1154 patients at three university hospitals in Norway. Data were collected 24/7 over a four-week period, with follow-up measurements from telemetry admission until hospital discharge.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of patients assigned to telemetry, 67 % (<em>n</em> = 767) met practice standards, corresponding to AHA Class I or II. Patients were predominantly men (65 %, <em>n</em> = 748), and the mean age was 65 years (SD ±16). The study included both patients with cardiac and non-cardiac diagnoses from various medical and surgical departments throughout the hospitals. Ninety-one percent of the patients in Class III were monitored based on indications that were reclassified from Class II to Class III (not indicated) in the updated practice standards (patients admitted with chest pain or post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without complications). Overall, arrhythmic events occurred in 37 % (<em>n</em> = 424) of patients, and they occurred in all classes. Eighteen percent (<em>n</em> = 59) of arrhythmic events occurred in Class III. Of all arrhythmias, 3 % (<em>n</em> = 14) were life threatening, and all of them occurring within Class I. Telemetry monitoring led to changes in clinical management in 22 % (<em>n</em> = 257) of patients due to clinical alarms, of which 71 % (<em>n</em> = 182) were related to medication management.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Most patients were appropriately monitored according to the AHA practice standards, meeting Class I and II. Arrhythmias occurred in all classes, but life-threatening arrhythmias only occurred in patients in Class I. However, a daily re-assessment of each patient's telemetry indication is warranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart & Lung\",\"volume\":\"68 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 217-226\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014795632400133X/pdfft?md5=b5abf060d4e398207cb09a8157a7e5d3&pid=1-s2.0-S014795632400133X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart & Lung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014795632400133X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart & Lung","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014795632400133X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:据我们所知,还没有前瞻性研究将临床实践与美国心脏协会(AHA)更新的院内遥测监护实践标准进行比较:因此,我们的目标是:(1) 调查如何根据美国心脏协会更新的实践标准将患者分配到遥测监护;(2) 确定心律失常事件的数量和类型;(3) 描述临床管理的后续变化:这项前瞻性多中心研究包括挪威三所大学医院的 1154 名患者。在为期四周的时间里全天候收集数据,从遥测入院到出院进行随访测量:在被分配进行遥测的患者中,67%(n = 767)符合实践标准,相当于美国心脏协会的 I 级或 II 级。患者主要为男性(65%,n = 748),平均年龄为 65 岁(SD ±16)。研究对象包括各医院内科和外科的心脏病和非心脏病患者。91% 的 III 级患者是根据更新后的实践标准中从 II 级重新划分为 III 级(无指征)的指征进行监测的(因胸痛或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 (PCI) 后无并发症入院的患者)。总体而言,37%(n = 424)的患者发生了心律失常事件,所有级别均有发生。18%(n = 59)的心律失常事件发生在 III 级。在所有心律失常中,3%(n = 14)有生命危险,且全部发生在 I 级。遥测监护导致 22% (n = 257)的患者因临床警报而改变临床管理,其中 71% (n = 182)与药物管理有关:结论:根据美国心脏协会的实践标准,大多数患者都得到了适当的监护,达到了 I 级和 II 级。所有级别的患者都发生了心律失常,但只有 I 级患者发生了危及生命的心律失常。
Appropriateness and outcomes of hospitalized patients telemetry monitored for cardiac arrhythmias in accordance with the American Heart Association Practice Standards–A multicenter study
Background
To the best of our knowledge, no prospective research studies have compared clinical practice to the American Heart Association (AHA) updated practice standards for in-hospital telemetry monitoring.
Objectives
Our aims were therefore (1) to investigate how patients were assigned to telemetry monitoring in accordance with the AHA's updated practice standards, (2) to determine the number and type of arrhythmic events, and (3) to describe subsequent changes in clinical management.
Methods
This prospective multicenter study included 1154 patients at three university hospitals in Norway. Data were collected 24/7 over a four-week period, with follow-up measurements from telemetry admission until hospital discharge.
Results
Of patients assigned to telemetry, 67 % (n = 767) met practice standards, corresponding to AHA Class I or II. Patients were predominantly men (65 %, n = 748), and the mean age was 65 years (SD ±16). The study included both patients with cardiac and non-cardiac diagnoses from various medical and surgical departments throughout the hospitals. Ninety-one percent of the patients in Class III were monitored based on indications that were reclassified from Class II to Class III (not indicated) in the updated practice standards (patients admitted with chest pain or post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without complications). Overall, arrhythmic events occurred in 37 % (n = 424) of patients, and they occurred in all classes. Eighteen percent (n = 59) of arrhythmic events occurred in Class III. Of all arrhythmias, 3 % (n = 14) were life threatening, and all of them occurring within Class I. Telemetry monitoring led to changes in clinical management in 22 % (n = 257) of patients due to clinical alarms, of which 71 % (n = 182) were related to medication management.
Conclusions
Most patients were appropriately monitored according to the AHA practice standards, meeting Class I and II. Arrhythmias occurred in all classes, but life-threatening arrhythmias only occurred in patients in Class I. However, a daily re-assessment of each patient's telemetry indication is warranted.
期刊介绍:
Heart & Lung: The Journal of Cardiopulmonary and Acute Care, the official publication of The American Association of Heart Failure Nurses, presents original, peer-reviewed articles on techniques, advances, investigations, and observations related to the care of patients with acute and critical illness and patients with chronic cardiac or pulmonary disorders.
The Journal''s acute care articles focus on the care of hospitalized patients, including those in the critical and acute care settings. Because most patients who are hospitalized in acute and critical care settings have chronic conditions, we are also interested in the chronically critically ill, the care of patients with chronic cardiopulmonary disorders, their rehabilitation, and disease prevention. The Journal''s heart failure articles focus on all aspects of the care of patients with this condition. Manuscripts that are relevant to populations across the human lifespan are welcome.