Talk:Cardioversion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article was started with text from the presumed public domain NIH publication "Facts About Arrhythmias/Rhythm Disorders" at http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/other/arrhyth.htm
Contents |
[edit] Citations are Necessary for Text
Would the author of the article like to add any? Tankblitz 01:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] error 404
The article linked outside is outdated and causes an error 404. I'll try to find a current link.
Edit: I found a few more links and added some content.
[edit] pads on back?
About pad placement, the article says " two pads are placed on the patient's chest, either in the anterior/lateral position or the anterior/posterior position". Whenever I've been cardioverted (for a-fib), there's always been a pad on my back, and one on my chest. Perhaps this sentence needs rewording? Cheers, Doctormatt 21:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Seems to me that your back is your posterior chest, but if you want it to read more accurately, you can change it from chest to ribcage (or thorax). MoodyGroove 22:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
- I see. I think "posterior chest" is better referred to as "back" in a non-medical encyclopedic context, so I've reworded that section a little. Cheers, Doctormatt 23:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Let's try again, Doctormatt. I wasn't happy with your edit because it makes it sound like the pad is either on the chest or the back. They are always both on the chest. I understand your objection, but obviously a pad on the lower back would be completely unacceptable. There's nothing wrong with using the word posterior, as long as it's appropriately hyperlinked. Why classify Wikipedia as "non-medical"? Would you call it non-scientific? It's whatever we make it. We aren't limited by space here. If you feel it needs more explanation, that's fine, but I don't want to oversimplify to the point of being inaccurate. MoodyGroove 00:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
- Yes, let's. When I've been cardioverted (7 times?), there has always been one pad on my back, and one on my chest (i.e., the anterior chest, as you call it) . To say it was on my chest (or even "posterior chest") is to speak in a non-conventional, medical specific way that would confuse the general reader. Rather than reverting my edit, could you not have simply added "upper" to have it say "upper back"? Cheers, Doctormatt 00:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose I could have, but I still wouldn't have been pleased with it. I apologize if you took any offense. Correct pad placement just happens to be a pet issue of mine. It is amazing how frequently health care professionals either fail to prepare the skin properly or put the pads in the wrong place (which increases transthoracic
impedenceimpedance and reduces the efficacy of cardioversion or transcutaneous pacing). When the anterior/posterior position is used, the anterior pad is supposed to be placed sideways on the left anterior chest below the nipple line and the posterior pad is supposed to be placed diagonally into the triangle defined by the spine and medial scapula on the left posterior chest, so that the left ventricle is "sandwiched" between the two pads. This is actually quite important to the topic of cardioversion. Do you have any objection to my taking this the opposite direction and explaining correct pad placement in more detail? MoodyGroove 01:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove- How about putting a general, lay-person appropriate description of the procedure in the introduction (where maybe the word "back" could be used), and then a longer discussion of pad placement, and maybe other issues, as their own sections, below that, with as much detail (provided references are provided) as you want? Cheers, Doctormatt 02:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks, Doctormatt.MoodyGroove 02:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
- I notice that doctors and other researchers make this mistake frequently in papers, grant proposals, manuals, and other correspondence. Impedance is spelled with an a, not an e. Its etymology combines impede with -ance by dropping the e. Just as there is a correct way to place pads on a patient, there is a correct way to place ance on a verb. --TedPavlic | talk 03:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the correction, TedPavlic. MoodyGroove 04:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
- How about putting a general, lay-person appropriate description of the procedure in the introduction (where maybe the word "back" could be used), and then a longer discussion of pad placement, and maybe other issues, as their own sections, below that, with as much detail (provided references are provided) as you want? Cheers, Doctormatt 02:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose I could have, but I still wouldn't have been pleased with it. I apologize if you took any offense. Correct pad placement just happens to be a pet issue of mine. It is amazing how frequently health care professionals either fail to prepare the skin properly or put the pads in the wrong place (which increases transthoracic
- Yes, let's. When I've been cardioverted (7 times?), there has always been one pad on my back, and one on my chest (i.e., the anterior chest, as you call it) . To say it was on my chest (or even "posterior chest") is to speak in a non-conventional, medical specific way that would confuse the general reader. Rather than reverting my edit, could you not have simply added "upper" to have it say "upper back"? Cheers, Doctormatt 00:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Let's try again, Doctormatt. I wasn't happy with your edit because it makes it sound like the pad is either on the chest or the back. They are always both on the chest. I understand your objection, but obviously a pad on the lower back would be completely unacceptable. There's nothing wrong with using the word posterior, as long as it's appropriately hyperlinked. Why classify Wikipedia as "non-medical"? Would you call it non-scientific? It's whatever we make it. We aren't limited by space here. If you feel it needs more explanation, that's fine, but I don't want to oversimplify to the point of being inaccurate. MoodyGroove 00:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
- I see. I think "posterior chest" is better referred to as "back" in a non-medical encyclopedic context, so I've reworded that section a little. Cheers, Doctormatt 23:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Who performs synchronized cardioversion
I removed this comment from the article (and similar comments from intubation and electrocardiogram):
- Only paramedics and physicians are qualified to perform electrical cardioversion.
It's inflammatory and it's not true. Regards, MoodyGroove 21:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
[edit] Internal Cardioversion?
I've seen quite a bit on Internal Cardioversion by catheterisation but there is nothing in this article reflecting this. Would it be worth adding a sentence somewhere on this? 212.159.118.191 (talk) 22:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
