Key result
Paramedics show ~58% sensitivity in recognizing STEMI on ECGs with frequent mimic misidentification.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the ability of paramedics in Saudi Arabia to recognize STEMI on 12-lead ECGs.
Does paramedic interpretation of 12-lead ECGs accurately identify STEMI in prehospital settings in Saudi Arabia?
Cross-Sectional (n=84)
No
Does paramedic interpretation of 12-lead ECGs accurately identify STEMI in prehospital settings in Saudi Arabia?
Paramedics in Saudi Arabia showed moderate sensitivity and low specificity in identifying STEMI, highlighting a need for additional ECG interpretation training to prevent inappropriate cath lab activations and missed diagnoses.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Paramedic STEMI recognition (58% sensitivity, 29% specificity) warrants caution in prehospital activation; leaves open whether targeted training improves accuracy in this setting.
Objective: To evaluate paramedic ability in recognizing 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) with ST-segment Elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a quantitative exploratory cross-sectional study using an electronic survey of paramedics was conducted between June and September 2021. The survey included demographics, educational and clinical experiences, and multiple 12-lead ECG strip questions to assess participants' ability to recognize STEMI. We reported the overall sensitivity, specificity, and correct proportions with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). Results: Eighty-four paramedics completed the survey, and 65% of them were between 24 and 29 years old, with a median, of three years of field experience. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 58.39% (95% CI, 50.4% to 66.1%) and 29.01% (95% CI, 25.15% to 33.1%), respectively. In total, 67.1% correctly identified inferior STEMI, whereas only 50% correctly identified lateral STEMI. Both STEMIs were correctly identified by 41%, and the majority misinterpreted STEMI mimics (ECG rhythms with similar ECG morphology to STEMI). The proportion who correctly recognized left bundle branch block was 14.8%, pericarditis was 10.9%, and ventricular pacing was 1.4%. However, almost third of participants correctly identified right bundle branch block (32.9%) and left ventricle hypertrophy (30.7%). Overall, there was no correlation between the correct ECG interpretation of STEMIs and educational and clinical experiences. Conclusion: Paramedics were able to identify STEMI events in prehospital settings with moderate sensitivity and low specificity with limited ability to differentiate between STEMI and STEMI mimics. Therefore, additional training in ECG interpretation could improve their clinical decision-making, and to ensure that proper care and treatment is provided. Further research on a large, representative sample of paramedics across the country could provide more definitive evidence to establish a greater degree of accuracy in detecting STEMI in prehospital settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alrumayh et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in STEMI (n=84). 12-lead ECG interpretation was evaluated on Overall sensitivity in recognizing STEMI (95% CI 50.4% to 66.1%). Paramedics demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 58.39% and specificity of 29.01% in recognizing STEMI on 12-lead ECGs, with limited ability to differentiate STEMI from mimics.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: