Tyler Black, MD Profile picture
Sep 28, 2019 14 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Quick Tutorial Thread for Twitter

Psychiatric Cardiology 101: QTc

Wherein a psychiatrist tries to teach cardiology (and hopefully doesn't embarrass themselves)

#psychtwitter #medtwitter #MedEd #psychchat #somemed #somepsych

Warning: MATH
What is QT? (Yes yes, it can be your texting shorthand to get your groove on)

QT refers to the interval on the electrocardiocgram, in milliseconds, between the START of the QRS complex to the END of the T Wave
(as the graph shows, if you wanna be super fancy, we calculate the end of the T wave by intersecting the maximum slope with the isoelectric baseline)
Why is QT important?

It is the electrical approximation of the time it takes for the ventricles to contract and relax

If the QT is too long (or short, think hypercalcemia and be careful, but we'll address this later), there is a risk for ventricular dysthymia and sudden death.
Long QT can lead to Torsades de Pointes (literally "twisting of the peaks"), which looks like a ventricular tachycardia rotating (like a helix).

TdP spontaneously and quickly reverts to normal rhythm, but it is likely to return & can lead to ventricular fibrillation and death.
So then what is QTc?

Well because rate will affect all intervals, it is necessary to adjust for rate to detect clinically important QT. With a fast rate, a shorter QT might be important, so you don't want to miss it. Conversely, you can tolerate longer QTs with a slow rate.
QTc is calculated by three main formulas. There is debate over which is best... but most of the cardiologists I respect tell me the Frederica formula is probably the closest.

1) calculate: RR interval in seconds
2) cube root that
3) use that number as the divisor of the QT
Example:

HR is 80bpm (RR = 60/HR = 0.75)
QT is 425msec
The cube root of RR is .9086

QTc=425msec/.9086=468 msec
So you have your QTc, now what?

1) please do your best to understand how your QTc will be calculated. Many machines that calculate it automatically will give you the Bazetts Formula (square root not cube root), which overcalls prolonged QTc at faster rates.
2) have your yellow/red zone set:

♀️:
caution: 450-460 msec
uh-oh: 460+

♂️:
caution: 430-450 msec
uh-oh: 450+
3) know your medications effect on QT!

The most FAMOUS psychiatric meds that prolong QT are antidepressants, but MOST DO NOT (except citalopram, escitalopram, and TCAs like amitriptyline)
The meds you need to be really careful about? ANTIPSYCHOTICS AND METHADONE. (No, not ADHD meds)

Lurasidone is so far the only "OK" antipsychotic for QT prolongation.

Methadone can increase QTc by more than 20s.
So ECG for all potential QT starts (*citalopram, TCAs, APs)?

I'm on team "yes." It's far higher value than the stupid MRIs and TSHs we order (brainlessly w/no benefit) and if a problem occurs, having a baseline ECG will be of huge value.

I'd also monitor regularly anyone who:
So please , learners, physicians, and psychiatrists, consider QTc knowledge as an important part of your medical practice, especially when you prescribe medications.

Also, when in doubt, work with your pharmacy colleagues to check interactions/additive effects.

/End thread

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Tyler Black, MD

Tyler Black, MD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tylerblack32

Nov 19
Battling Election Misinformation
Part 2: "The Mandate"

Contrary to media/republican pronouncements, the election of Donald Trump was one of the narrowest (by popular vote, +1.73%) in history, with only 7 elections since 1800 being narrower.

/1Image
In fact, if we look at the margin of victory when we include all eligible voters, Trump wins with 31.3% of the voting population, compared to Harris' 30.2% and 1% going to other candidates. 37.4% did not vote.

If we only include voters, Trump wins 50.03% to 49.97%

/2Image
When we look at the electoral college results, Trump won 58% of available electoral college votes. This would rank his election 41st out of 57 elections since 1800.

/3Image
Read 7 tweets
Nov 15
"[AIDS] is not being caused by a virus. It's not a virus... These people are dying because of 'poppers'... they were people who were part of a gay lifestyle... "

"This is not a viral disease, but it's a disease that is environmental."

- HHS Secretary Nominee RFK Jr

/1Image
Chemicals in water are causing trans kids: "A lot of the problems we see in kids... are coming from chemical exposures, including a lot of the sexual dysphoria that we’re seeing."

- HHS Secretary Nominee RFK Jr

/2Image
Wifi radiation causes autism, allergies, asthma, eczema: “I think it degrades your mitochondria and it opens your blood-brain barrier,”

- HHS Secretary Nominee RFK Jr

/3Image
Read 7 tweets
Nov 7
🧵Battling Antivax Disinfo🧵
Vaccination did NOT increase cancer deaths.

Here I took the 6 deadliest cancers (all 5 survival rates under 50%) in a highly vaccinated population (25-54), and we can see ZERO evidence of vaccine-related cancer deaths, all the way to May 2024.

/1Image
If i move ages to 55+, we see the same thing, and we are now looking at a lot of deaths from these extremely aggressive cancers, so this isn't some underpowered stuff here. There is NO evidence that deadly cancers have increased due to vaccination.

None.

/2Image
If we take all ages 5+ and look for until May 2024, we see no increase in these highly aggressive cancer deaths, or any cancer deaths.

/3Image
Read 8 tweets
Nov 7
The Presidential Election
Data Geekery with my interpretations

1) The Country Shifted, but More Didn't.

The final share will be ~ +1.3 to +1.5% for Trump, which is a shift of ~+5.8%.

If America was a room with 65 people in it, only 2 out of the 65 people switched shirts.

/1Image
Note: this math might seem like it doesn't work, but we have to remember to include those that voted 3rd party (1.5%ish) and those that didn't vote (about 35%).

Excluding non-voters who were eligible,
2020: 22/43 D & 20/43 R
2024: 20/42 D & 21/42 R

/2Image
In other words, the great majority of the country didn't switch, but we know there was definitely a nudge towards republican vote.

What does this mean?
The narratives about "America changing" should be very cautious, as 93% of America did not change.

/3
Read 11 tweets
Sep 3
🚨COVID-19 Vaccination saves lives and improves outcomes 🚨

In this UK study of >3 MILLION PEOPLE who vaccinated, the incidence of mental health problems was significantly reduced when a subsequent COVID-19 infection occurred.

/1Image
Looking at the totals who were infected with COVID-19, it is clear that COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with a ROBUST increase in mental health problems after the diagnosis.

/2 Image
This adds to the massive and still growing body of evidence that Covid 19 Vaccination was safe, effective, and extremely important especially considering that after this study, virtually everyone was infetcted with COVID-19.

/3
Read 5 tweets
Aug 29
Yet another study finding differential impacts (mostly with decrease of symptoms) on the mental health of youth comparing prepandemic to pandemic times.

The media far far far less likely to report on these now common findings.

/1


jamanetwork.com/journals/jaman…
My colleagues and I talked about this at length, that there were many reasons to be cautious about the early "expert predictions" and in fact when good evidence was considered, many so-called evidence based scientists were wrong: dire outcomes on mental health harder to find.

/2


Our '23 peer-reviewed commentary here, g despite many professionals who attacked my us for daring to suggest we interpret evidence cautiously rather than childishly reducing issues & acting like sensationalists, I am certain our publciation holds up well.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(