Ⅰ和aVF导联联合Ⅱ导联法与传统Ⅰ和Ⅲ导联法判断QRS平均心电轴的比较  

Comparison in judging QRS mean axis between method of lead Ⅰ-lead aVF combined with lead Ⅱor traditional leadⅠ-lead Ⅲ method

作　　者：郭雪娅[1] 唐宇宁 袁若雯 李秀丽[1] 白锋[1] 余静[1] Guo Xueya;Tang Yuning;Yuan Ruowen;Li Xiuli;Bai Feng;Yu Jing(Department of Cardiology,Second Hospital of Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730030,China;不详)

机构地区：[1]兰州大学第二医院心内科,兰州730030

出　　处：《中国循证心血管医学杂志》2021年第2期198-201,共4页Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine

基　　金：兰州大学教学资助项目(2017234)。

摘　　要：目的比较Ⅰ和aVF导联目测判断QRS平均心电轴与Ⅰ和Ⅲ导联判断电轴的优势。方法采用整群抽样法抽取兰州大学第二临床医学院2015级临床医学生,分为研究组和对照组,研究组用导联Ⅰ和aVF判断电轴,对照组用导联Ⅰ和Ⅲ判断电轴。判断标准依据心电图机系统化数据为参考结果。结果应用导联Ⅰ和aVF判断其中3个象限的心电轴快速准确;当电轴在“left”象限时,需要联合Ⅱ导联正负相判断。Ⅰ和Ⅲ导联误判率相对较高。结论用Ⅰ和aVF导联判断QRS平均心电轴快速准确,可用于临床。Objective To compare the advantages between leadⅠ-lead aVF method and leadⅠ-leadⅢmethod in judging QRS mean axis.Methods The students of clinical medicine of grade 2015 were selected by using cluster sampling method from the Second School of Clinical Medicine of Lanzhou University,and then divided into study group and control group.QRS mean axis was judged by using lead Ⅰ-lead aVF method in study group and by using lead Ⅰ-leadⅢmethod in control group.The results of ECG machine systematic data were taken as judging criterion.Results The lead Ⅰ-lead aVF method was quick and accurate in judging 3 quadrants of QRS mean axis.When QRS mean axis was at left quadrant,leadⅡwas combined with lead Ⅰ-lead aVF for judging positive and negative quadrants.The false rate of lead Ⅰ-leadⅢmethod was higher.Conclusion The lead Ⅰ-lead aVF method is quick and accurate in judging QRS mean axis,which can be used in clinical practice.

关 键 词：QRS平均心电轴 Ⅰ和aVF导联 Ⅰ和Ⅲ导联 

分 类 号：R540.41[医药卫生—心血管疾病]