Abstract
Background
Use of communication devices in the hospital environment remains controversial. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) can affect different medical devices. Potential sources for EMI on ECG machines were systematically tested.
Hypothesis
Communication devices produce EMI on ECG machines. EMI impairs ECG interpretation.
Methods
The communication devices tested were: a global system for mobile communication (GSM) receiver, a code division multiple access (CDMA) receiver, an analog phone, a wireless local area network, and an alpha‐numeric pager. EMI was tested on 3 ECG machines: MAC 5000, MAC 1200, and ELI 100. The devices were tested at 2 and 1 meter, 50, 25, and 0 cm from the acquisition module. The ECGs were presented to a heterogeneous group of clinical providers, (medical students, residents, nurses, industry representatives from cardiac devices companies, and attending cardiologists) to evaluate the impact of EMI on ECG interpretation skills.
Results
EMI was detected on the MAC 5000 ECG machine when activated GSM, CDMA, and analog phones were placed on top of the acquisition module. No EMI was seen on the other ECG machines or when phones were at a longer distance or deactivated. EMI was incorrectly diagnosed in 18% of the cases. EMI was confused most frequently with atrial fibrillation or flutter (52%), ventricular arrhythmias (22%), and pacemaker dysfunction (26%). Medical students (p < 0.003) and non‐cardiology residents (p = 0.05) demonstrated significantly worse performance on EMI interpretation.
Conclusions
Digital and analog phones produce EMI on modern ECG machines when activated in direct contact to the acquisition module. EMI impairs ECG interpretation. Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Keywords: electromagnetic interference, communication devices, ECG interpretation
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (5.9 MB).
References
- 1. Klein AA, Djaiani GN: Mobile phones in the hospital—Past, present and future. Anaesthesia 2003; 58: 353–357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Myerson SG, Mitchell AR: Mobile phones in hospitals. BMJ 2003; 326: 140–141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Medical Devices Agency: Electromagnetic compatibility of medical devices with mobile communications. Devices Bulletin DB9702. London: Department of Health; 1997. [Google Scholar]
- 4. Kidd AG, Sharrat C, Coleman J: Mobile communication regulations updated: How safely are doctors' telephones used. Qual Saf Health Care 2004; 13: 478. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Tri JL, Hayes DL, Smith TT, Severson RP: Cellular phone interference with external cardiopulmonary monitoring devices. Mayo Clin Proc 2001; 76: 373–375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Altamura G, Toscano S, Gentilucci G, Ammirati F, Castro A, et al.: Influence of digital and analogue cellular telephones on implanted pacemakers. Eur Heart J 1997; 18: 1532–1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Muratore C, Rabinovich R, Baranchuk A, Carballido R, Sosa Liprandi MI, et al.: Electromagnetic interference of cellular phones over implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Rev Arg Cardiol 1998; 66: 317–320. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Shaw SI, Kacmarek RM, Hampton RL, Riggi V, Masry AE, et al.: Cellular phone interference with the operation of mechanical ventilators. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 928–931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Tri JL, Severson RP, Firl AR, Hayes DL, Abenstein JP: Cellular telephone interference with medical equipment. Mayo Clin Proc 2005; 80: 1286–1290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Baranchuk A, Shaw C, Alanazi H, Campbell D, Bally K, et al.: ECG pitfalls and artifacts: The 10 commandments. Crit Care Nurse 2008; (in press). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Srikureja W, Darbar D, Reeder GS: Tremor‐induced ECG artifact mimicking ventricular tachycardia. Circulation 2000;102: 1337–1338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Morrissey JJ, Swicord M, Balzano Q: Characterization of electromagnetic interference of medical devices in the hospital due to cell phones. Health Phsyics 2002; 82: 45–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Brodlie M, Robertson D, Wyllie J: Interference of electrocardiographic recordings by a mobile telephone. Cardiology in the Young 2007; 17: 328–329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Finsterer J, Stollberger C, Gatterer E: Oral anticoagulation for ECG tremor artifact simulating atrial fibrillation. Acta Cardiol 2003; 58: 425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Davidenk JM, Snyder LS: Causes of errors in the electrocardiographic diagnosis of atrial fibrillation by physicians. J Electrocardiol 2007; 40: 450–456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Knight BP, Pelosi F, Michaud G, Strickberger A, Morady F: Clinical consequences of electrocardiographic artifact mimicking ventricular tachycardias. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1270–1274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]