Search Results

ecg@home is a personal single lead ECG transtelephonic transmitter. The device is intended for self-testing by patients by recording ten seconds of the first standard lead (D1) or of the second standard lead (D2) of the electrocardiogram. The recording is activated by the patient when symptoms are experienced or whenever desired as routine recordings to be analyzed by a trained physician.

Ecg@home is a personal single lead ECG transtelephonic transmitter characterized by the following features:

• Internal battery operation
• Patient activated acquisition of Standard lead D1 (lead D2 by means of an external auxiliary electrode)
• Storage of 10 seconds of acquired ecg signal
• Use of two built-in "thumb electrodes" (US Pat. Nº 5,928,141)
• LCD display featuring the following characteristics:
  • Indication of the battery charge status
  • Indication that signal acquisition is active
  • Indication that a noisy acquisition has been performed
  • Indication that data transmission is active
  • Indication that the recording is stored in memory
  • Indication of the istantaneous and of the mean heart rate frequency
• Digital ecg transfer via RS232 serial digital port to a computer
• Acustic transtelephonic ecg transfer via common phone line

The use of two built-in patented electrodes allows the patient to record the electrocardiogram lead D1 by simply placing his thumbs on the electrodes. The two patented electrodes are designed in such a way to minimize noise and base-line shifts due to relative movements at the electrode/skin interface.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information for the ecg@home device, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document does not explicitly state acceptance criteria in a structured table or qualitative descriptions. However, it implicitly suggests that the device's performance should be "satisfactory" and "comparable" to a common electrocardiograph recorder.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated. The document mentions "a set of in vivo clinical tests have been performed in order to asses the performances of the device." but does not quantify the number of patients or recordings.
• Data Provenance: Prospective (in vivo clinical tests).
• Country of Origin: Italy (Tests were performed at the Medical University School of Brescia, Italy).

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

• Number of Experts: Not explicitly stated.
• Qualifications of Experts: The document mentions that the recordings are to be "analyzed by a trained physician" for the intended use, and the tests were performed at a "Medical University School." This implies that the ground truth was established by medical professionals, likely physicians with expertise in ECG interpretation, but specific qualifications (e.g., "radiologist with 10 years of experience") are not provided.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not specified. The document only states that the recordings were "highly satisfactory and comparable to those obtained with a common electrocardiograph recorder," implying a qualitative assessment, but no details on how discrepancies (if any) between the device's recordings and the common recorder's were resolved or how multiple expert opinions were combined.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• MRMC Study: No, a multi-reader multi-case comparative effectiveness study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance was not performed or described. The document pertains to a medical device's performance, not an AI-assisted diagnostic workflow.
• Effect Size of Human Readers with/without AI: Not applicable, as this was not an MRMC study involving AI assistance for human readers.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study

• Standalone Study: Yes, in essence, the "in vivo clinical tests" can be considered a standalone performance study for the device itself.
  • The device's recordings (ecg@home) were directly compared against the recordings from a "common electrocardiograph recorder" to assess its inherent performance (i.e., the quality and comparability of the ECG signal generated by the device).

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: The ground truth was established by comparing the device's ECG recordings to those obtained from a "common electrocardiograph recorder" (a widely accepted and presumably gold-standard clinical device for ECG recording) and assessed by medical professionals. This can be considered a form of expert assessment against a reference standard.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size: Not applicable. The ecg@home device described in the document is a hardware device for recording ECGs, not a machine learning or AI algorithm that requires a training set.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

• Ground Truth Establishment: Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device