Correspondence
ECG Criteria of the San Francisco Syncope Rule

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.06.570Get rights and content

References (5)

  • V. Thiruganasambandamoorthy et al.

    External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule in the Canadian setting

    Ann Emerg Med

    (2010)
  • J.V. Quinn et al.

    Derivation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with short-term serious outcomes

    Ann Emerg Med

    (2004)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (5)

  • Syncope risk stratification in the ED

    2014, Autonomic Neuroscience: Basic and Clinical
    Citation Excerpt :

    These inconsistencies might be related to the heterogeneous ECG interpretation characterizing those studies. It is of importance to point out that in their original paper, Quinn and colleagues (Quinn et al., 2004; Quinn and McDermott, 2011) considered as an abnormal ECG any new alteration, including the ECG abnormalities observed during a patient's monitoring in the ED. In contrast, the above mentioned studies focused only on the ECG features obtained at ED presentation (Sun et al., 2007; Birnbaum et al., 2008; Dipaola et al., 2010; Thiruganasambandamoorthy et al., 2010).

  • Syncope risk stratification in the emergency department

    2013, Cardiology Clinics
    Citation Excerpt :

    These inconsistencies might be related to the heterogeneous ECG interpretation characterizing those studies.10 For example, Quinn and colleagues20,21 considered as an abnormal ECG any new alteration, including the ECG abnormalities observed during a patient’s monitoring in the ED. In contrast, other studies focused only on the ECG features obtained at ED presentation.

  • Syncope

    2012, Emergency Medicine: Clinical Essentials, SECOND EDITION
  • San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict short-term serious outcomes: A systematic review

    2011, CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal
    Citation Excerpt :

    In their original publications, the authors of the San Francisco Syncope Rule specified that the result was positive if any nonsinus rhythm or any new changes were present on the electrocardiogram (ECG).3,4 They recently clarified that the ECG criterion was not to be limited to a single evaluation but should include any available ECGs, as well as cardiac monitoring in the emergency department.17 It is likely that in studies performed after the original derivation study, cardiac arrhythmia registered during monitoring in the emergency department was inconsistently classified as a missed serious outcome.

Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article that might create any potential conflict of interest. The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement.

View full text