Key result
6-lead smartphone ECG shows reasonable agreement with 12-lead ECG in athletes and genetic heart disease patients.
Why the study?
Smartphone ECGs offer an innovative way to capture transient arrhythmias in athletes, but the accuracy of 6-lead smartphone ECGs compared with 12-lead ECGs needed assessment.
Does a 6-lead smartphone ECG provide accurate interval measurements compared to a standard 12-lead ECG in athletes and patients with genetic heart disease?
Cross-Sectional (n=49)
Does a 6-lead smartphone ECG provide accurate interval measurements compared to a standard 12-lead ECG in athletes and patients with genetic heart disease?
A 6-lead smartphone ECG shows reasonable agreement with a standard 12-lead ECG for basic interval measurements, making it a viable option for opportunistic arrhythmia capture.
May support smartphone ECG for interval checks in athletes and genetic heart disease; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: Smartphone electrocardiograms (iECGs) are an innovative method of capturing transient arrhythmias that are occasionally experienced by athletes. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of a 6-lead iECG compared with 12-lead ECG in athletes and those with known genetic heart disease (positive controls). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Each participant had a resting 12-lead ECG (supine) and a 30 s 6-lead iECG (seated) taken within 2 h. Manual measurements of heart rate, QTc, and PR intervals, and QRS duration were completed using digital calipers. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the quantitative agreement of measurements. All other measurements were shorter in the 6-lead. QTc mean difference was smaller in the positive controls (4.7 ± 26.0 ms) than in athletes (12.5 ± 25.0 ms). The largest difference was in PR intervals, both in athletes (12.8 ± 17.7 ms) and positive controls (7.6 ± 18.9 ms). QRS duration had the smallest mean difference (0.6 ± 9.0 ms in athletes, 1.0 ± 12.7 ms in positive controls). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-lead readings had reasonable agreement with the 12-lead ECG. A 6-lead iECG is a reasonable option to opportunistically capture arrhythmias that may occur infrequently, but should not replace a 12-lead if available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Orchard et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Athletes and genetic heart disease (n=49). 6-lead smartphone ECG vs. 12-lead ECG was evaluated on Quantitative agreement of heart rate, QTc, PR intervals, and QRS duration. A 6-lead smartphone ECG showed reasonable agreement with a 12-lead ECG in athletes and genetic heart disease patients, with QRS duration having the smallest mean difference (0.6 ± 9.0 ms in athletes).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: