• Rami Mohammad, Sachil Shah, Elie Donath, Nicholas Hartmann, Ann Rasmussen, Shaun Isaac, and Steven Borzak.
• University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Palm Beach Regional Campus, Atlantis, FL. Electronic address: Rami.mohammad@gmail.com.
• J Electrocardiol. 2015 May 1;48(3):426-9.

BackgroundTelemetry is increasingly used to monitor hospitalized patients with lower intensities of care, but its effect on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes in non-critical care patients is unknown.HypothesisTelemetry utilization in non-critical care patients does not affect IHCA outcomes.MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis of all patients in non-critical care beds that experienced a cardiac arrest in a university-affiliated teaching hospital during calendar years 2011 and 2012 was performed. Data were collected as part of AHA Get With the Guidelines protocol. The independent variable and exposure studied were whether patients were on telemetry or not. Telemetry was monitored from a central location. The primary endpoint was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and the secondary end point was survival to discharge.ResultsOf 123 IHCA patients, the mean age was 75±15 and 74 (61%) were male. 80 (65%) patients were on telemetry. Baseline demographics were similar except for age; patients on telemetry were younger with mean age of 70.3 vs. 76.8 in the non-telemetry group (p=0.024). 72 patients (60%) achieved ROSC and 46 (37%) achieved survival to discharge. By univariate analysis, there was no difference between patients that had been on telemetry vs. no telemetry in ROSC (OR=1.13, p=0.76) or survival to discharge (OR=1.18, p=0.67). Similar findings were obtained with multivariate analysis for ROSC (0.91, p=0.85) and survival to discharge (OR=0.92, p=0.87).ConclusionsThe use of cardiac telemetry in non-critical care beds, when monitored remotely in a central location, is not associated with improved IHCA outcomes.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…