Key result
Emergency physician ECG interpretation matches specialists in 74% of suspected ACS cases.
Why the study?
Does ECG interpretation by emergency physicians differ from specialist physicians in patients with suspected ACS?
Observational (n=641)
No
Does ECG interpretation by emergency physicians differ from specialist physicians in patients with suspected ACS?
Effect estimate: kappa = 0.51
Emergency physician interpretation of ECGs in suspected ACS shows moderate agreement with specialists, highlighting a potential need for improved medical education in ECG interpretation.
May necessitate specialist ECG review in ambiguous suspected ACS cases; leaves open whether targeted training improves concordance.
QUESTION UNDER STUDY: Emergency room (ER) interpretation of the ECG is critical to assessment of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Our aim was to assess its reliability in our institution, a tertiary teaching hospital. METHODS: Over a 6-month period all consecutive patients admitted for ACS were included in the study. ECG interpretation by emergency physicians (EPs) was recorded on a preformatted sheet and compared with the interpretation of two specialist physicians (SPs). Discrepancies between the 2 specialists were resolved by an ECG specialist. RESULTS: Over the 6-month period, 692 consecutive patients were admitted with suspected ACS. ECG interpretation was available in 641 cases (93%). Concordance between SPs was 87%. Interpretation of normality or abnormality of the ECG was concordant between EPs and SPs in 475 cases (74%, kappa = 0.51). Interpretation of ischaemic modifications was concordant in 69% of cases, and as many ST segment elevations were unrecognised as overdiagnosed (5% each). The same findings occurred for ST segment depressions and negative T waves (12% each). CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of the ECG recorded during ACS by 2 SPs was discrepant in 13% of cases. Similarly, EP interpretation was discrepant from SP interpretation in 25% of cases, equally distributed between over- and underdiagnosing of ischaemic changes. The clinical implications and impact of medical education on ECG interpretation require further study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2004 study conducted an observational in Suspected acute coronary syndromes (ACS) (n=641). ECG interpretation by emergency physicians vs. ECG interpretation by specialist physicians was evaluated on Concordance of ECG interpretation (normality or abnormality) between emergency physicians and specialist physicians (kappa = 0.51). ECG interpretation by emergency physicians was concordant with specialist physicians in 74% of suspected ACS cases (kappa = 0.51), with discrepancies equally distributed between over- and underdiagnosing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: