Is telemetry overused? Is it as helpful as thought?

Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

Volumn 76, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 368-372

  Henriques Forsythe, Marshaleen N ^a   Kamuguisha, Lois Kemilembe K ^a   Ivonye, Chinedu C ^a,b   Olejeme, Kelechukwu A ^a   Jamched, Uma ^a   Onwuanyi, Anekwe E ^a  

^a MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Grady Memorial Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART DISEASE; HUMAN; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STANDARD; TELEMETRY; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY, AMBULATORY; HEART DISEASES; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; TELEMETRY;

EID: 67149125857     PISSN: 08911150     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.76a.07260     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI). Space-proven medical monitor: the total patient care package. Health and medicine. Originating technology/NASA contribution. Spinoff 2006. www.sti.nasa.gov/Textonly/tto/Spinoff2006/hm_2.html. Accessed 1/2009.
2. Jaffe AS, Atkins JM, Field JM, et al. Recommended guidelines for in-hospital cardiac monitoring of adults for detection of arrhythmia. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 18:1431-1433.
3. Drew BJ, Califf RM, Funk M, et al. Practice standards for electrocardiographic monitoring in hospital settings: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Councils on Cardiovascular Nursing, Clinical Cardiology, and Cardiovascular Disease in the Young: endorsed by the International Society of Computerized Electrocardiology and the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses. Circulation 2004; 110:2721-2746.
4. Saleem MA, McClung JA, Aronow WS, Kannam H. Inpatient telemetry does not need to be used in the management of older patients hospitalized with chest pain at low risk for in-hospital coronary events and mortality. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2005; 60:605-606.
5. Durairaj L, Reilly B, Das K, et al. Emergency department admissions to inpatient cardiac telemetry beds: a prospective cohort study of risk stratification and outcomes. Am J Med 2001; 110:7-11.
6. Goldman A, Cook EF, Johnson PA, et al. Prediction of the need for intensive care in patients who come to emergency departments with acute chest pain. N Engl J Med 1996; 334:1498-1504.
7. Sivaram CA, Summers JH, Ahmed N. Telemetry outside critical care units: patterns of utilization and influence on management decisions. Clin Cardiol 1998; 21:503-505.
8. Estrada CA, Rosman HS, Prasad NK, et al. Role of telemetry monitoring in the non-intensive care unit. Am J Cardiol 1995; 76:960-965.
9. Hollander JE, Valentine SM, McCuskey CF, Brogan GX. Are monitored telemetry beds necessary for patients with nontraumatic chest pain and normal or nonspecific electrocardiograms? Am J Cardiol 1997; 79:1110-1111.
10. Snider A, Papaleo M, Beldner S, et al. Is telemetry monitoring necessary in low-risk suspected acute chest pain syndromes? Chest 2002; 122:517-523.
11. Schull MJ, Redelmeier DA. Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring and cardiac arrest outcomes in 8,932 telemetry ward patients. Acad Emerg Med 2000; 7:647-652.
12. Knight BP, Pelosi F, Michaud GF, Strickberger SA, Morady F. Clinical consequences of electrocardiographic artifact mimicking ventricular tachycardia. N Engl J Med 1999; 341:1270-1274.
13. Mehta NB. The doctors' challenge: How can we follow guidelines better? Cleve Clin J Med 2004; 71:81-85.
14. Adams AS, Soumerai SB, Lomas J, Ross-Degnan D. Evidence of self-reporting bias in assessing adherence to guidelines. Int J Quality Health Care 1999; 11:187-192.