Abstract
The accuracy, timeliness, and reliability of the current methods of heart rate (HR) determination in neonatal resuscitation are debatable, each having its own limitations. We aim to compare three methods of HR assessment: (1) traditional stethoscope, (2) electrocardiogram and traditional stethoscope, and (3) digital stethoscope with loudspeaker amplification of heart sounds. This was a simulated crossover experiment using a high-fidelity manikin. Each team with a physician, a nurse, and a respiratory therapist performed the resuscitations using the three methods (three different scenarios) in different order. The person controlling the HR via manikin controller was blinded, but the single recorder and the providers were not. Eighteen resuscitations were completed (six teams of three methods each). The time to first HR recording (p < 0.001), total number of HR recorded (p < 0.001), and time to recognize dips in HR was significantly improved in the digital stethoscope group (p = 0.009). Use of digital stethoscope with amplification improved documentation of HR and earlier recognition of HR changes. · Amplified heartbeats during neonatal resuscitation improved documentation.. · Amplified infant heartbeats resulted in earlier recognition of HR changes (increase or decrease).. · Providers using this method had greater satisfaction..
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
