An automatic two-pass algorithm reliably calculated the QT-interval compared to experienced cardiologists, with a non-significant difference of 3.64 msec, even with major baseline wander.
Does a novel two-pass automatic algorithm accurately measure the QT-interval compared to manual measurement by experienced cardiologists?
A novel two-pass algorithm can reliably and automatically calculate the QT-interval beat-to-beat, even in the presence of major baseline wander.
Effect estimate: Mean difference 3.64 msec
p-value: p=n.s.
An algorithm for automatic measurement of the QT-interval is described. The algorithm consists of two passes. In the first pass the differentiated signal is passed through an existing QRS-detector which is modified to detect the end of T-wave. The pointers found for Q-onset and T-end are used for creation of a filter, which estimates the low frequency part of the signal. Subsequently this estimate is subtracted from the original signal where after the same algorithm is applied for the second pass. Validation was done on recordings of 20 patients; 1861 triple beats were randomly selected and eyeball measurements of the QT duration were performed by two experienced cardiologists. The difference of the QT-interval between the cardiologists and the algorithm was 3.64 msec (n.s.). It is concluded that the algorithm reliably calculates the QT-interval, even if major baseline wander is present.>
Meij et al. (Tue,) conducted a other in QT-interval measurement (n=20). Automatic two-pass algorithm vs. Eyeball measurements by experienced cardiologists was evaluated on Difference of the QT-interval between the cardiologists and the algorithm (Mean difference 3.64 msec, p=n.s.). An automatic two-pass algorithm reliably calculated the QT-interval compared to experienced cardiologists, with a non-significant difference of 3.64 msec, even with major baseline wander.