BMJ Open (Nov 2021)

Manual QT interval measurement with a smartphone-operated single-lead ECG versus 12-lead ECG: a within-patient diagnostic validation study in primary care

  • Ralf E Harskamp,
  • Wim A M Lucassen,
  • Joris R de Groot,
  • Pieter G Postema,
  • Jelle C L Himmelreich,
  • Jonas S S G de Jong,
  • Evert P M Karregat,
  • Lisa Beers,
  • Lisa P van Adrichem

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055072
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 11

Abstract

Read online

Objective To determine the accuracy of QT measurement in a smartphone-operated, single-lead ECG (1L-ECG) device (AliveCor KardiaMobile 1L).Design Cross-sectional, within-patient diagnostic validation study.Setting/participants Patients underwent a 12-lead ECG (12L-ECG) for any non-acute indication in primary care, April 2017–July 2018.Intervention Simultaneous recording of 1L-ECGs and 12L-ECGs with blinded manual QT assessment.Outcomes of interest (1) Difference in QT interval in milliseconds (ms) between the devices; (2) measurement agreement between the devices (excellent agreement <20 ms and clinically acceptable agreement <40 ms absolute difference); (3) sensitivity and specificity for detection of extreme QTc (short (≤340 ms) or long (≥480 ms)), on 1L-ECGs versus 12L-ECGs as reference standard. In case of significant discrepancy between lead I/II of 12L-ECGs and 1L-ECGs, we developed a correction tool by adding the difference between QT measurements of 12L-ECG and 1L-ECGs.Results 250 ECGs of 125 patients were included. The mean QTc interval, using Bazett’s formula (QTcB), was 393±25 ms (mean±SD) in 1L-ECGs and 392±27 ms in lead I of 12L-ECGs, a mean difference of 1±21 ms, which was not statistically different (paired t-test (p=0.51) and Bland Altman method (p=0.23)). In terms of agreement between 1L-ECGs and lead I, QTcB had excellent agreement in 66.9% and clinically acceptable agreement in 93.4% of observations. The sensitivity and specificity of detecting extreme QTc were 0% and 99.2%, respectively. The comparison of 1L-ECG QTcB with lead II of 12L-ECGs showed a significant difference (p=<0.01), but when using a correction factor (+9 ms) this difference was cancelled (paired t-test (p=0.43) or Bland Altman test (p=0.57)). Moreover, it led to improved rates of excellent (71.3%) and clinically acceptable (94.3%) agreement.Conclusion Smartphone-operated 1L-ECGs can be used to accurately measure the QTc interval compared with simultaneously obtained 12L-ECGs in a primary care population. This may provide an opportunity for monitoring the effects of potential QTc-prolonging medications.