This is a little flip. They obviously weren’t measuring the wrong thing because they kept going and resuscitated her. The EKG was mentioned as one datapoint on the state of her physical body.
Edit: I’m writing this comment because in almost any real situation, some of the standard measurements won’t be useful. Pulling out one and concluding “EKGs are wrong” (or whatever equivalent) is a pretty easy and common way to feel smart in the moment and make worse choices overall.
"They obviously weren’t measuring the wrong thing because they kept going and resuscitated her."
No.
They disregarded the measurements.
The measurements mentioned in the story obviously failed them, so they went with their own judgement instead (or maybe some other measurements not mentioned in the story.. but I'm just going by what's given in the story, not some imagined account of what might have happened instead).
> The measurements mentioned in the story obviously failed them
The measurement didn't "fail" them. It told them the truth, that is that she didn't have electrical activity in her hearth. If they would have seen a different rhythm they would have given her a different treatment. For example if they would have seen one of the shockable rhythms they would have given her the appropriate shock.
> so they went with their own judgement instead
Instead? From what you say it sounds like there is some rule preventing people from continuing efforts if they see a flat ECG. That is not true. The medical providers didn't use their judgement "instead" of the measurement. They used their judgement factoring in all the things they measured, known, heard, and sensed. (including but not limited to the flat ECG measurement)
Time and temperature are other measurements mentioned in the article. Since it’s a hospital, you should probably assume some other data are available too. If you’ve never been to a hospital or doctor’s office, you can either google “standard health data used in hospitals” or take my word for it that they have tools other than just EKGs. (I have been to several hospitals!)
Disregarding the EKG until temperature is in a normal range is 1) what the article says they did and 2) a combination of two different metrics to paint a more complete picture than just one datapoint would provide. The EKG didn’t fail them. It was a memorable anecdote meant to convey to the author the state the body was in when it arrived.
Edit: I’m writing this comment because in almost any real situation, some of the standard measurements won’t be useful. Pulling out one and concluding “EKGs are wrong” (or whatever equivalent) is a pretty easy and common way to feel smart in the moment and make worse choices overall.