A non-invasive, concealed electrocardiogram and bioimpedance measurement system for captive primates.

Captive housed non-human primates, specifically great apes such as chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are frequently reported to have died from or are diagnosed with potentially fatal heart conditions that require the monitoring of physiological signals such as electrocardiogram (ECG) or respiratory rate. ECG screening must be conducted after applying full anaesthesia, causing potential physical and emotional stress as well as risk for the animal. Here, we present an electronic system that simultaneously measures the ECG and the electrical bioimpedance for the early detection of abnormal cardiovascular activity. Modified gloves whose fingers are equipped with electrodes enable the caregiver to obtain three cardiovascular signals (ECG, pulse rate and respiratory rate) by placing the fingertips on specific parts of the non-human primate without needing any prior physical preparations. Validation (ECG and bioimpedance) was performed both on humans and on captive housed chimpanzees, where all the signals of interest were correctly acquired.

The QT Scale: A Weight Scale Measuring the QTc Interval.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the strong evidence of the clinical utility of QTc prolongation as a surrogate marker of cardiac risk, QTc measurement is not part of clinical routine either in hospital or in physician offices. We evaluated a novel device ("the QT scale") to measure heart rate (HR) and QTc interval. METHOD: The QT scale is a weight scale embedding an ECG acquisition system with four limb sensors (feet and hands: lead I, II, and III). We evaluated the reliability of QT scale in healthy subjects (cohort 1) and cardiac patients (cohorts 2 and 3) considering a learning (cohort 2) and two validation cohorts. The QT scale and the standard 12-lead recorder were compared using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in cohorts 2 and 3. Absolute value of heart rate and QTc intervals between manual and automatic measurements using ECGs from the QT scale and a clinical device were compared in cohort 1. RESULTS: We enrolled 16 subjects in cohort 1 (8 w, 8 m; 32 ± 8 vs 34 ± 10 years, P = 0.7), 51 patients in cohort 2 (13 w, 38 m; 61 ± 16 vs 58 ± 18 years, P = 0.6), and 13 AF patients in cohort 3 (4 w, 9 m; 63 ± 10 vs 64 ± 10 years, P = 0.9). Similar automatic heart rate and QTc were delivered by the scale and the clinical device in cohort 1: paired difference in RR and QTc were -7 ± 34 milliseconds (P = 0.37) and 3.4 ± 28.6 milliseconds (P = 0.64), respectively. The measurement of stability was slightly lower in ECG from the QT scale than from the clinical device (ICC: 91% vs 80%) in cohort 3. CONCLUSION: The "QT scale device" delivers valid heart rate and QTc interval measurements.