Advanced

Comparison of teaching the basic electrocardiographic concept of frontal plane QRS axis using the classical versus the orderly electrocardiogram limb lead displays

Pahlm, Ulrika LU ; O'Brien, J E; Pettersson, Jonas; Pahlm, Olle LU ; White, Thomas; Maynard, C and Wagner, G S (1997) In American Heart Journal 134(6). p.1014-1018
Abstract
This study compares the effectiveness of teaching the calculation of frontal plane QRS axis with the use of the classical versus the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display. Eighty-three students from two environments were randomized into two groups and were taught to determine frontal plane axis with one of the methods. The accuracy and time to determine the axis were tested on 10 electrocardiograms. In the United States the group using the classical display achieved 4.2 (+/-2.7) correct answers, whereas those using the orderly method achieved 6.8 (+/-3.0) (p = 0.0006). The classical group used 9.2 (+/-2.8) minutes to complete the test, whereas the orderly group needed 7.2 (+/-2.0) minutes (p = 0.015). The results achieved in... (More)
This study compares the effectiveness of teaching the calculation of frontal plane QRS axis with the use of the classical versus the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display. Eighty-three students from two environments were randomized into two groups and were taught to determine frontal plane axis with one of the methods. The accuracy and time to determine the axis were tested on 10 electrocardiograms. In the United States the group using the classical display achieved 4.2 (+/-2.7) correct answers, whereas those using the orderly method achieved 6.8 (+/-3.0) (p = 0.0006). The classical group used 9.2 (+/-2.8) minutes to complete the test, whereas the orderly group needed 7.2 (+/-2.0) minutes (p = 0.015). The results achieved in Sweden were similar. The use of the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display results in greater diagnostic accuracy in less time than the classical display when determining the frontal plane QRS axis. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
American Heart Journal
volume
134
issue
6
pages
1014 - 1018
publisher
Mosby
external identifiers
  • scopus:0031445806
ISSN
1097-6744
DOI
10.1016/S0002-8703(97)70020-6
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
141cdbc9-c1cb-4e5e-9cd1-6a91bc830a09 (old id 1296451)
date added to LUP
2009-07-31 13:27:50
date last changed
2017-01-15 03:36:09
@article{141cdbc9-c1cb-4e5e-9cd1-6a91bc830a09,
  abstract     = {This study compares the effectiveness of teaching the calculation of frontal plane QRS axis with the use of the classical versus the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display. Eighty-three students from two environments were randomized into two groups and were taught to determine frontal plane axis with one of the methods. The accuracy and time to determine the axis were tested on 10 electrocardiograms. In the United States the group using the classical display achieved 4.2 (+/-2.7) correct answers, whereas those using the orderly method achieved 6.8 (+/-3.0) (p = 0.0006). The classical group used 9.2 (+/-2.8) minutes to complete the test, whereas the orderly group needed 7.2 (+/-2.0) minutes (p = 0.015). The results achieved in Sweden were similar. The use of the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display results in greater diagnostic accuracy in less time than the classical display when determining the frontal plane QRS axis.},
  author       = {Pahlm, Ulrika and O'Brien, J E and Pettersson, Jonas and Pahlm, Olle and White, Thomas and Maynard, C and Wagner, G S},
  issn         = {1097-6744},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {6},
  pages        = {1014--1018},
  publisher    = {Mosby},
  series       = {American Heart Journal},
  title        = {Comparison of teaching the basic electrocardiographic concept of frontal plane QRS axis using the classical versus the orderly electrocardiogram limb lead displays},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8703(97)70020-6},
  volume       = {134},
  year         = {1997},
}