27 ECG monitoring during NRP: A false sense of security?

Abstract

Abstract Primary Subject area Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine Background During neonatal resuscitation, use of an electrocardiogram (ECG) provides a more reliable measurement of heart rate than auscultation or pulse oximetry. Having an ECG monitor may, however, provide a false sense of security in the unlikely scenario of a newborn with pulseless rhythms. This could delay critical resuscitative steps during neonatal resuscitation. Objectives The aim of this study is to evaluate whether the presence of ECG monitoring has an impact on the resuscitative steps of neonatal resuscitation providers. Design/Methods We conducted a prospective crossover randomized controlled trial, which took place at Sainte-Justine University Health Center in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Residents, fellows, attending physicians, transport nurses, and respiratory therapists were recruited in teams of three. They participated in two simulation scenarios (pulseless electrical activity [PEA] with and without ECG monitoring). Teams were randomized to one of the scenarios and then crossed over. A debriefing session followed the two scenarios. All sessions were video-recorded. The primary outcome was the time to pulse check once the simulated mannequin was programmed to become pulseless. Secondary outcomes were the number of pulse checks, time to intubation, time to start of chest compressions, and time to administration of epinephrine. Results Preliminary results (n=5 groups, 10 scenarios) showed that the time to check the pulse once the mannequin was pulseless was longer when ECG electrodes were used (98.0 vs 55.6 sec, p = 0.07). There was a statistically significant decreased number of pulse checks with the ECG compared to without (2.4 vs 5.6, p = 0.004). Time to start of positive pressure ventilation (31.3 vs 27 sec), intubation (182.4 vs 179.2 sec), chest compressions (235.2 vs 227.6 sec), and epinephrine administration (340.8 vs 241.5 sec), were all increased in the presence ECG monitoring, but the difference between groups was not statistically significant. Conclusion ECG monitoring may alter the behaviour of individuals and delay recognition of a pulseless state, but preliminary data suggest that clinical endpoints are not affected.