Mia Kassab, Alexander Johnson, Dania Kallas, Sonia Franciosi, Jeffrey Bone, Sakethram Saravu Vijayashankar, Shubhayan Sanatani
{"title":"Amusement Park Rides and Cardiac Devices: Heart Dropper or Device Stopper?","authors":"Mia Kassab, Alexander Johnson, Dania Kallas, Sonia Franciosi, Jeffrey Bone, Sakethram Saravu Vijayashankar, Shubhayan Sanatani","doi":"10.1111/jce.70087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are essential for managing cardiac conditions, but may malfunction due to magnetic fields > 10,000 mG. Roller coasters using linear induction motors (LIMs) generate magnetic fields, yet their potential for electromagnetic interference (EMI) with CIEDs is unclear. This study assesses magnetic field exposure on amusement park rides and examines healthcare provider recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Magnetic field strength was measured using gaussmeters placed at shoulder and abdomen levels, representing pediatric CIED sites. Rides at an amusement park were tested at least four times, recording median and maximum magnetic field strengths per second throughout the ride. Magnetic field strengths were compared between rides with health advisory messages (HAMs) and without (NHAMs). A survey was distributed to the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) and the Canadian Council of Cardiovascular Nurses to assess healthcare provider recommendations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 15 rides were sampled: 11 with HAMs and 4 with NHAM. The mean magnetic field strength was higher for HAM rides (2.9 mG) than NHAM rides (1.6 mG; p = 0.05). Maximum field strength was also greater in HAM rides (46.4 vs. 6.5 mG; p < 0.001), and in rides using LIMs (n = 2) compared to those using other mechanisms (211.7 vs. 7.8 mG; p < 0.001). Only 18.1% (n = 13) of healthcare providers relied on published resources for amusement park ride recommendations, while 58.3% (n = 42) advised patients to consider HAMs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Magnetic field strengths on all rides were clinically insignificant, posing minimal EMI risk for CIED patients. Further validation and standardized guidelines are needed to inform healthcare recommendations for patients with CIEDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.70087","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are essential for managing cardiac conditions, but may malfunction due to magnetic fields > 10,000 mG. Roller coasters using linear induction motors (LIMs) generate magnetic fields, yet their potential for electromagnetic interference (EMI) with CIEDs is unclear. This study assesses magnetic field exposure on amusement park rides and examines healthcare provider recommendations.
Methods: Magnetic field strength was measured using gaussmeters placed at shoulder and abdomen levels, representing pediatric CIED sites. Rides at an amusement park were tested at least four times, recording median and maximum magnetic field strengths per second throughout the ride. Magnetic field strengths were compared between rides with health advisory messages (HAMs) and without (NHAMs). A survey was distributed to the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) and the Canadian Council of Cardiovascular Nurses to assess healthcare provider recommendations.
Results: A total of 15 rides were sampled: 11 with HAMs and 4 with NHAM. The mean magnetic field strength was higher for HAM rides (2.9 mG) than NHAM rides (1.6 mG; p = 0.05). Maximum field strength was also greater in HAM rides (46.4 vs. 6.5 mG; p < 0.001), and in rides using LIMs (n = 2) compared to those using other mechanisms (211.7 vs. 7.8 mG; p < 0.001). Only 18.1% (n = 13) of healthcare providers relied on published resources for amusement park ride recommendations, while 58.3% (n = 42) advised patients to consider HAMs.
Conclusion: Magnetic field strengths on all rides were clinically insignificant, posing minimal EMI risk for CIED patients. Further validation and standardized guidelines are needed to inform healthcare recommendations for patients with CIEDs.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.