Background: Assessment of heart rate (HR) is essential during newborn resuscitation, and comparison of dry-electrode ECG technology to standard monitoring by 3-lead ECG and Pulse Oximetry (PO) is lacking.
Methods: NeoBeat, ECG, and PO were applied to newborns resuscitated at birth. Resuscitations were video recorded, and HR was registered every second.
Results: Device placement time from birth was median (quartiles) 6 (4, 18) seconds for NeoBeat versus 138 (97, 181) seconds for ECG and 152 (103, 216) seconds for PO. Time to first HR presentation from birth was 22 (13, 45) seconds for NeoBeat versus 171 (129, 239) seconds for ECG and 270 (185, 357) seconds for PO. Proportion of time with HR feedback from NeoBeat during resuscitation from birth was 85 (69, 93)%, from arrival at the resuscitation table 98 (85, 100)%, and during positive pressure ventilation 100 (95, 100)%. For ECG, these proportions were, 25 (0, 43)%, 28 (0, 56)%, and 33 (0, 66)% and for PO, 0 (0, 16)%, 0 (0, 16)%, and 0 (0, 18)%. All p < 0.0001.
Conclusions: NeoBeat was faster to place, presented HR more rapidly, and provided feedback on HR for a larger proportion of time during ongoing resuscitation compared to 3-lead ECG and PO.
Keywords: ECG; NeoBeat; Pulse Oximetry; dry-electrode technology; electrocardiogram; heart rate assessment; heart rate monitoring; neonatal resuscitation; newborn resuscitation; resuscitation guidelines.