A comparison of a precordial belt ECG and a gel-adhesive electrode in terms of ECG acquisition time and usability in emergency department patients

Abstract

An electrocardiogram (ECG) is a fast, valuable, and non-invasive test that has a wide range of uses in the diagnosis, examination, screening, and prognosis of many cardiac and non-cardiac morbidities. The study was designed as a prospective, single-blind randomized controlled, single center. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement is used. The patients were divided into two groups: Group Gel Adhesive Electrode (GAE) and Group precordial belt ECG (PBE), according to the ECG recording technique. The results between the two groups were compared. A total of 250 patients were included in the study. 127 patients were included in the Group GAE and 123 patients were included in the Group PBE. The mean ECG recording time of patients in the Group GAE was 86.83 ± 22.53 seconds, while it was 59.56 ± 15.08 seconds in the Group PBE. When the ECG recording time is evaluated, the mean of the patients in the Group PBE is shorter, and there is a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). When evaluated in terms of the need for repeat ECG acquisitions of the ECG (Group PBE: 9.75%, Group GAE: 14.96%), there is no statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.251). Causes of a repeat ECG were chest hair (Group GAE: 3.15%, Group PBE: 6.50%; p = 0.215), perspiration (Group GAE: 8.66%, Group PBE: 3.15%; p = 0.108), shaking (Group GAE: 15%, Group PBE: 0%; p = 0.122). Compared to the GAE, the precordial ECG Belt may be more advantageous in terms of examination time.