Clinical validation and evaluation of a novel six-lead handheld electrocardiogram recorder compared to the 12-lead electrocardiogram in unselected cardiology patients (EVALECG Cardio)

Abstract

Abstract Aims Handheld electrocardiogram (ECG) monitors are increasingly used by both healthcare workers and patients to diagnose cardiac arrhythmias. There is a lack of studies validating the use of handheld devices against the standard 12-lead ECG. The Kardia 6L is a novel handheld ECG monitor which can produce a 6-lead ECG. In this study, we compare the 6L ECG against the 12-lead ECG. Methods and results A prospective study consisting of unselected cardiac inpatients and outpatients at Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust. All participants had a 12- and 6-lead ECGs. All ECG parameters were analysed by using a standard method template for consistency between independent observers. Electrocardiograms from the recorders were compared by the following statistical methods: linear regression, Bland–Altman, receiver operator curve, and kappa analysis. There were 1015 patients recruited. The mean differences between recorders were small for PR, QRS, cardiac axis, with receiver operator analysis area under the curve (AUC) of >80%. Mean differences for QT and QTc (between recorders) were also small, with AUCs for QT leads of >75% and AUCs for QTc leads of >60%. Key findings from Bland–Altman analysis demonstrate overall an acceptable agreement with few outliers instances (<6%, Bland–Altman analysis). Conclusion Several parameters recorded by the Kardia 6L (QT interval in all six leads, rhythm detection, PR interval, QRS duration, and cardiac axis) perform closely to the gold standard 12-lead ECG. However, that consistency weakens for left ventricular hypertrophy, QRS amplitudes (Lead I and AVL), and ischaemic changes.