Background Heart rate (HR) is used to guide interventions during delivery room (DR) neonatal resuscitation. Dry electrode ECG (NeoBeat) may detect HR more rapidly than pulse oximetry (PO) and portable ECG, but real-time comparisons of these devices are lacking.
Design/methods PO, ECG and NeoBeat were placed sequentially on newborns in the DR. Time for device placement and time to accurate HR acquisition were noted.
Results DR resuscitations of 28 preterm/term infants were observed. The NeoBeat was placed faster (ie, 3 s) than PO (20 s, p=<0.0001) and ECG (16 s, p=<0.0001). Total time from initiation of device placement to HR acquisition was fastest with NeoBeat (13 s) versus ECG (42 s, p<0.0001) and PO (105 s, p<0.0001) (duration values=median).
Conclusions These observations in a small cohort of relatively well neonates demonstrate that the NeoBeat is significantly faster to place and consistently acquires HR faster than PO and ECG.
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Correction notice This article has been corrected since it first published. The provenance and peer review statement has been included.
Contributors JBB: conception of the work, acquisition and interpretation of data. CC and JP: conception of the work and interpretation of data. VC: analysis of the data.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests JP has previously received travel grants from Laerdal Global health to oversee Research in Tanzania.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.