南非农村医院糖尿病门诊成人校正QT间期计算公式的比较

IF 0.6 Q4 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
BN Mkhwanazi, L. Govender, S. Pillay
{"title":"南非农村医院糖尿病门诊成人校正QT间期计算公式的比较","authors":"BN Mkhwanazi, L. Govender, S. Pillay","doi":"10.1080/16089677.2022.2151175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: A prolonged corrected QT (QTc) interval on the electrocardiograph is an important marker of cardiac autonomic neuropathy and increased risk of developing arrhythmias. Various formulae exist for the calculation of QTc, the most common being Bazett’s, which is also the default formula utilised by the Edan SE® ECG machine to automatically calculate QTc. Little or no literature exists on the comparisons of the various formulae in patients living with diabetes, more especially in those diabetes patients with HIV infection. Methods: Retrospective (n = 631) electrocardiographs were collected and analysed. QT and RR were measured for QTc calculation. QTc was calculated using three formulae, namely Bazett (QTcB), Fridericia (QTcFri) and Framingham (QTcFram). Additionally, the automated QTc (QTcM), which used Bazett’s formula, was recorded for comparison purposes. To determine the optimal formula for QTc calculation, slopes and r 2 using a QTc/RR regression analysis were calculated. The formula with the r 2 closest to zero was deemed superior when compared with its counterparts. Results: The QTc Bazett was the worst-performing formula for QTc calculation, with the QTcFri performing best across both type 2 and type 1 diabetes patients with or without HIV infection. To validate which formula was employed in the automated QTc result, a mean difference comparison was performed, which indicated a non-significant difference between the machine-calculated QTcM and QTcB (p = 0.572, 0.384, 0.980) in all groups except for the type 1 diabetic group without HIV (p = 0.009). These findings indicated that the automated QTc employed Bazett’s formula. Conclusion: Evidence from this study has shown that the best formula to calculate QTc in patients with DM, with and without HIV infection, is the Fridericia formula. The authors advise that careful consideration should be taken when selecting a formula for QTc calculation. This will improve precision diagnosis and patient care.","PeriodicalId":43919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endocrinology Metabolism and Diabetes of South Africa","volume":"32 1","pages":"49 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of formulae for calculating the corrected QT (QTc) interval in an adult population attending a diabetes clinic at a rural hospital in South Africa.\",\"authors\":\"BN Mkhwanazi, L. Govender, S. Pillay\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/16089677.2022.2151175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: A prolonged corrected QT (QTc) interval on the electrocardiograph is an important marker of cardiac autonomic neuropathy and increased risk of developing arrhythmias. Various formulae exist for the calculation of QTc, the most common being Bazett’s, which is also the default formula utilised by the Edan SE® ECG machine to automatically calculate QTc. Little or no literature exists on the comparisons of the various formulae in patients living with diabetes, more especially in those diabetes patients with HIV infection. Methods: Retrospective (n = 631) electrocardiographs were collected and analysed. QT and RR were measured for QTc calculation. QTc was calculated using three formulae, namely Bazett (QTcB), Fridericia (QTcFri) and Framingham (QTcFram). Additionally, the automated QTc (QTcM), which used Bazett’s formula, was recorded for comparison purposes. To determine the optimal formula for QTc calculation, slopes and r 2 using a QTc/RR regression analysis were calculated. The formula with the r 2 closest to zero was deemed superior when compared with its counterparts. Results: The QTc Bazett was the worst-performing formula for QTc calculation, with the QTcFri performing best across both type 2 and type 1 diabetes patients with or without HIV infection. To validate which formula was employed in the automated QTc result, a mean difference comparison was performed, which indicated a non-significant difference between the machine-calculated QTcM and QTcB (p = 0.572, 0.384, 0.980) in all groups except for the type 1 diabetic group without HIV (p = 0.009). These findings indicated that the automated QTc employed Bazett’s formula. Conclusion: Evidence from this study has shown that the best formula to calculate QTc in patients with DM, with and without HIV infection, is the Fridericia formula. The authors advise that careful consideration should be taken when selecting a formula for QTc calculation. This will improve precision diagnosis and patient care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Endocrinology Metabolism and Diabetes of South Africa\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"49 - 55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Endocrinology Metabolism and Diabetes of South Africa\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/16089677.2022.2151175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endocrinology Metabolism and Diabetes of South Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16089677.2022.2151175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心电图上校正QT间期延长是心脏自主神经病变和发生心律失常风险增加的重要标志。QTc的计算公式多种多样,最常见的是Bazett的公式,这也是Edan SE®心电图机自动计算QTc的默认公式。关于糖尿病患者,尤其是合并HIV感染的糖尿病患者的各种方剂比较的文献很少或没有。方法:收集回顾性心电图(n = 631)进行分析。测量QT和RR,计算QTc。QTc采用Bazett (QTcB)、Fridericia (QTcFri)和Framingham (QTcFram)三个公式计算。此外,还记录了使用Bazett公式的自动QTc (QTcM),以便进行比较。为了确定最佳的QTc计算公式,使用QTc/RR回归分析计算斜率和r2。与其他公式相比,r2最接近于零的公式被认为是更好的。结果:QTc Bazett是QTc计算中表现最差的公式,而QTcFri在2型和1型糖尿病患者(无论是否感染HIV)中表现最佳。为了验证自动QTc结果中采用的是哪一种公式,进行了平均差异比较,结果表明,除了没有HIV的1型糖尿病组(p = 0.009)外,所有组中机器计算的QTcM和QTcB之间无显著差异(p = 0.572, 0.384, 0.980)。这些发现表明,自动QTc采用了Bazett公式。结论:本研究证据表明,无论是否感染HIV,计算DM患者QTc的最佳公式为Fridericia公式。作者建议在选择QTc计算公式时应慎重考虑。这将提高精确诊断和病人护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of formulae for calculating the corrected QT (QTc) interval in an adult population attending a diabetes clinic at a rural hospital in South Africa.
Background: A prolonged corrected QT (QTc) interval on the electrocardiograph is an important marker of cardiac autonomic neuropathy and increased risk of developing arrhythmias. Various formulae exist for the calculation of QTc, the most common being Bazett’s, which is also the default formula utilised by the Edan SE® ECG machine to automatically calculate QTc. Little or no literature exists on the comparisons of the various formulae in patients living with diabetes, more especially in those diabetes patients with HIV infection. Methods: Retrospective (n = 631) electrocardiographs were collected and analysed. QT and RR were measured for QTc calculation. QTc was calculated using three formulae, namely Bazett (QTcB), Fridericia (QTcFri) and Framingham (QTcFram). Additionally, the automated QTc (QTcM), which used Bazett’s formula, was recorded for comparison purposes. To determine the optimal formula for QTc calculation, slopes and r 2 using a QTc/RR regression analysis were calculated. The formula with the r 2 closest to zero was deemed superior when compared with its counterparts. Results: The QTc Bazett was the worst-performing formula for QTc calculation, with the QTcFri performing best across both type 2 and type 1 diabetes patients with or without HIV infection. To validate which formula was employed in the automated QTc result, a mean difference comparison was performed, which indicated a non-significant difference between the machine-calculated QTcM and QTcB (p = 0.572, 0.384, 0.980) in all groups except for the type 1 diabetic group without HIV (p = 0.009). These findings indicated that the automated QTc employed Bazett’s formula. Conclusion: Evidence from this study has shown that the best formula to calculate QTc in patients with DM, with and without HIV infection, is the Fridericia formula. The authors advise that careful consideration should be taken when selecting a formula for QTc calculation. This will improve precision diagnosis and patient care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
20.00%
发文量
15
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信