Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 20 April 2010
- Published on: 15 March 2010
- Published on: 20 April 2010Re:Diagnosing an MI: don't trust the monitor - standardise it!Show More
Dear Dr Johnson,
Thank you for your letter with its very interesting comments about inappropriate filter settings for electrocardiographs and monitors. This has been a research interest of mine for many years and Professor Chamberlain in Brighton has been aware of it since the early 1980's. You obviously have put in a significant amount of work in tracing your 50 patients. The 0.05 to 100 Hz settings are fine f...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 15 March 2010Diagnosing an MI: don't trust the monitor - standardise it!Show More
We read with interest Dr Tayler et al's piece entitled 'Diagnosing an MI: don't trust the monitor!'[1]. We have had a similar experience with ECG filter-related artefactual ST segment change, resulting in patient referral direct to the catheter lab for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. As a consequence, we have audited the variation in ECG filter settings utilised during the acute coronary syndrome 'patient jou...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.