Comparison of infant heart rate assessment by auscultation, ECG and oximetry in the delivery room

Clinical assessment of an infant’s heart rate (HR) in the delivery room (DR) has been reported to be inaccurate. We compared auscultation of the HR using a stethoscope with electrocardiography (ECG) and pulse oximetry (PO) for determining the HR in 92 low-risk newborn infants in the DR. Caregivers a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition Vol. 103; no. 5; pp. F490 - F492
Main Authors Murphy, Madeleine C, De Angelis, Laura, McCarthy, Lisa K, O’Donnell, Colm Patrick Finbarr
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BMJ Publishing Group LTD 01.09.2018
Subjects
Accuracy
Babies
Cardiac arrhythmia
Caregivers
Data analysis
Data collection
Ethics
Heart rate
Infants
Medical instruments
Newborn babies
Scholarships & fellowships
clinical assessment of heart rate
pulse oximetry
electrocardiogram
newborn
infant
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Clinical assessment of an infant’s heart rate (HR) in the delivery room (DR) has been reported to be inaccurate. We compared auscultation of the HR using a stethoscope with electrocardiography (ECG) and pulse oximetry (PO) for determining the HR in 92 low-risk newborn infants in the DR. Caregivers auscultated the HR while masked to the HR on the monitor. Auscultation underestimated ECG HR (mean difference (95% CI) by −9 (−15 to –2) beats per minute (bpm)) and PO HR (mean difference (95% CI) by −5 (−12 to 2) bpm). The median (IQR) time to HR by auscultation was 14 (10–18) s. As HR was determined quickly and with reasonable accuracy by auscultation in low-risk newborns, study in high-risk infants is warranted.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1359-2998
1468-2052
DOI:10.1136/archdischild-2017-314367