Article Data

  • Views 2157
  • Dowloads 180

Original Research

Open Access

A comparison of a precordial belt ECG and a gel-adhesive electrode in terms of ECG acquisition time and usability in emergency department patients

  • Ömerul Faruk Aydın1
  • Sarper Yilmaz2,*,

1Emergency Medicine Department of Yeni Yüzyıl University Faculty of Medicine Private Gaziosmanpaşa Hospital, 34245 Istanbul, Turkey

2Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Kartal Dr. Lutfi Kirdar City Hospital, 34865 Istanbul, Turkey

DOI: 10.22514/sv.2023.002 Vol.19,Issue 3,May 2023 pp.152-158

Submitted: 11 August 2022 Accepted: 18 November 2022

Published: 08 May 2023

*Corresponding Author(s): Sarper Yilmaz E-mail:


An electrocardiogram (ECG) is a fast, valuable, and non-invasive test that has a wide range of uses in the diagnosis, examination, screening, and prognosis of many cardiac and non-cardiac morbidities. The study was designed as a prospective, single-blind randomized controlled, single center. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement is used. The patients were divided into two groups: Group Gel Adhesive Electrode (GAE) and Group precordial belt ECG (PBE), according to the ECG recording technique. The results between the two groups were compared. A total of 250 patients were included in the study. 127 patients were included in the Group GAE and 123 patients were included in the Group PBE. The mean ECG recording time of patients in the Group GAE was 86.83 ± 22.53 seconds, while it was 59.56 ± 15.08 seconds in the Group PBE. When the ECG recording time is evaluated, the mean of the patients in the Group PBE is shorter, and there is a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). When evaluated in terms of the need for repeat ECG acquisitions of the ECG (Group PBE: 9.75%, Group GAE: 14.96%), there is no statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.251). Causes of a repeat ECG were chest hair (Group GAE: 3.15%, Group PBE: 6.50%; p = 0.215), perspiration (Group GAE: 8.66%, Group PBE: 3.15%; p = 0.108), shaking (Group GAE: 15%, Group PBE: 0%; p = 0.122). Compared to the GAE, the precordial ECG Belt may be more advantageous in terms of examination time.


Electrocardiogram; Precordial belt ECG; Gel adhesive electrode; Cardiac care

Cite and Share

Ömerul Faruk Aydın,Sarper Yilmaz. A comparison of a precordial belt ECG and a gel-adhesive electrode in terms of ECG acquisition time and usability in emergency department patients. SignaVitae. 2023. 19(3);152-158.


[1] Di Somma S, Paladino L, Vaughan L, Lalle I, Magrini L, Magnanti M. Overcrowding in emergency department: an international issue. Internal and Emergency Medicine. 2015; 10: 171–175.

[2] Bernstein SL, Aronsky D, Duseja R, Epstein S, Handel D, Hwang U, et al. The effect of emergency department crowding on clinically oriented outcomes. Academic Emergency Medicine. 2009; 16: 1–10.

[3] Yiadom MYAB, Baugh CW, McWade CM, Liu X, Song KJ, Patterson BW, et al. Performance of emergency department screening criteria for an early ECG to identify ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2017; 6: e003528.

[4] Keats A, Moran D, Rothwell S, Woodcock T, Williams T, Rawat N. A quality improvement project to reduce door-to-electrocardiogram time: a multicenter study. Journal of the Saudi Heart Association. 2018; 30: 180–187.

[5] AlGhatrif M, Lindsay J. A brief review: history to understand fundamentals of electrocardiography. Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives. 2012; 2: 14383.

[6] Wagner GS, Macfarlane P, Wellens H, Josephson M, Gorgels A, Mirvis DM, et al. AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram. Circulation. 2009; 119: e262–e270.

[7] Meziane N, Webster JG, Attari M, Nimunkar AJ. Dry electrodes for electrocardiography. Physiological Measurement. 2013; 34: R47–R69.

[8] Bell SJ, Clifton J, Pease J, Greenfield JC, Leggett S, Maynard C, et al. The evaluation of a precordial ECG BELT: technologist satisfaction and accuracy of recording. Journal of Electrocardiology. 2001; 34: 155–159.

[9] Yang H, Ji S, Chaturvedi I, Xia H, Wang T, Chen G, et al. Adhesive biocomposite electrodes on sweaty skin for long-term continuous electrophysiological monitoring. ACS Materials Letters. 2020; 2: 478–484.

[10] Yiadom MYAB, Gong W, Patterson BW, Baugh CW, Mills AM, Gavin N, et al. Fallacy of median door-to-ECG time: hidden opportunities for STEMI screening improvement. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2022; 11: e024067.

[11] Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2010; 152: 726–732.

[12] B Bergamaschi L, D’Angelo EC, Paolisso P, Toniolo S, Fabrizio M, Angeli F, et al. The value of ECG changes in risk stratification of COVID-19 patients. Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology. 2021; 26: e12815.

[13] S Rodrigues M, Fiedler P, Küchler N, P Domingues R, Lopes C, Borges J, et al. Dry electrodes for surface electromyography based on architectured titanium thin films. Materials. 2020; 13: 2135.

[14] Goz F, Baran G. Determination of nurses’ evaluations and training needs regarding electrocardiography (ECG). Journal of Cumhuriyet University School of Nursing. 2000; 4: 1–6. (In Turkish)

[15] Doğan DH, Melek M. Determination of nurses’ levels of recognizing ECG findings in emergency heart diseases and evaluating appropriate treatment approaches. Turkish Society of Cardiology Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. 2012; 1–10. (In Turkish)

[16] Kania M, Rix H, Fereniec M, Zavala-Fernandez H, Janusek D, Mroczka T, et al. The effect of precordial lead displacement on ECG morphology. Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing. 2014; 52: 109–119.

[17] Bond RR, Finlay DD, Nugent CD, Breen C, Guldenring D, Daly MJ. The effects of electrode misplacement on clinicians’ interpretation of the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram. European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2012; 23: 610–615.

[18] Mills H, Stein HI, Mandel WJ. The precordial ECG belt for obtaining rapid reproducible precordial leads. Journal of Electrocardiology. 1979; 12: 407–410.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index The CAS Source Index (CASSI) Search Tool is an online resource that can quickly identify or confirm journal titles and abbreviations for publications indexed by CAS since 1907, including serial and non-serial scientific and technical publications.

Index Copernicus The Index Copernicus International (ICI) Journals database’s is an international indexation database of scientific journals. It covered international scientific journals which divided into general information, contents of individual issues, detailed bibliography (references) sections for every publication, as well as full texts of publications in the form of attached files (optional). For now, there are more than 58,000 scientific journals registered at ICI.

Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research The Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research (GFMER) is a non-profit organization established in 2002 and it works in close collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO). The overall objectives of the Foundation are to promote and develop health education and research programs.

Scopus: CiteScore 1.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Embase Embase (often styled EMBASE for Excerpta Medica dataBASE), produced by Elsevier, is a biomedical and pharmacological database of published literature designed to support information managers and pharmacovigilance in complying with the regulatory requirements of a licensed drug.

Submission Turnaround Time