Search

Objective: ECG interpretation is prone to errors that can lead to relevant misdiagnoses and incorrect treatment. Prompts are one way in lectures to encourage learning from one’s own mistakes and to reduce error rates. Prompts are measures such as questions, hints, and suggestions of content-related or metacognitive nature, which can lead to self-explanation in the learner and thus to a deeper understanding of an issue. The aim of the study was therefore to investigate whether the use of prompts can reduce the error rate in ECG interpretation among students.Method: In a 2x2 experimental test and control group design, =100 final year medical students carried out ECG interpretation tasks in the form of online case vignettes in CASUS. In these tasks, justification prompts (B) and error analysis prompts (F) were systematically varied in four groups and the learning success was measured using a knowledge test. In addition, prior knowledge in ECG interpretation, motivation, interest in the topic, subjective confidence in ECG interpretation, and cognitive load was collected.Results: Neither error analysis prompts nor justification prompts had a significant effect on the correct ECG interpretation by students, (1,96)=1.03, =.31. Justification prompts seemed to have a positive effect on the confidence of answering the questions, (1,96)=10.15, =.002, =.10; and a negative effect on student motivation, (1,96)=8.13 , =.005, =.08; but both with comparable diagnostic accuracy.Conclusion: The present study could not confirm the positive effects of prompts on the error rate in ECG interpretation reported in the literature but showed significant effects on subjective confidence and motivation which should be investigated in further studies.

Copyright of Herzschrittmachertherapie und Elektrophysiologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

More than one year ago COVID-19 emerged to a rapidly expanding global pandemic. Along with a growing number of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2, we gained substantial knowledge on development, progression and treatment of the disease. In the light of increasing worldwide infection rates during the current "third wave", we will give a short update on COVID-19 from a cardiological point-of-view., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Cardiac rhythm monitoring plays an integral role in the diagnosis and treatment of various conditions. Technological developments of recent years have partly increased the ease of use and the availability of cardiac rhythm monitoring. Yet, the multitude of options has also added confusion. Various manufacturers offer devices for pulse wave and electrocardiogram analysis. Their use plays an important role in clinical routine, both for diagnostic purposes and for the need to interpret opportunistic findings. This article is intended to provide an overview of existing technologies and to highlight their advantages and disadvantages. It also is intended to introduce future technologies. In any case it is important to emphasize that numerous clinical trials will be required to evaluate the benefit of modern cardiac rhythm monitoring and foster its medical use.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has rapidly spread around the world and has led to a substantial morbidity and mortality in many countries. Although Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) is primarily a respiratory tract infection, there is growing evidence that other organs including the cardiovascular system are affected by COVID-19. In this review, we summarize the association of myocardial injury with in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, we discuss potential mechanisms of myocardial injury including myocarditis and vascular thrombosis. Last, we review the current evidence on drugs which have been evaluated or are currently tested for the treatment of COVID-19 patients., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Dilative cardiomyopathy (DCM) has an incidence of 5-8/100,000 inhabitants, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy an incidence of 1/500 inhabitants. Depending on specific risk factors both conditions have an increased risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD): in DCM reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and reduced physical capacity; and in HCM SCD in family members, left ventricular septum  > 30 mm, unclear syncope, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) on holter-ECG and inadequate blood pressure response on ergometer. Especially patients with intermediary risk factors are insufficiently classified, and the lifesaving implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) often leads to a significant number of device-related complications. In this area additional methods like late enhancement imaging with cardio MRI, identification of genetic variation and ECG characteristics could help improve risk stratification in these patients.

Genetic testing already has a substantial impact in identifying hereditary arrhythmia syndromes after sudden death in young patients. This report provides information on current developments, available options and reasonable approaches in the clinical setting. In addition the limitations of genetic testing are discussed. Genetic testing is only useful for patients in the context of clinical findings interpreted by an experienced cardiogenetics team.