Background: No direct comparison of current electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation programs exists. Objective: Assess the accuracy of ECG interpretation programs in detecting abnormal rhythms and flagging for priority review records with alterations secondary to acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: More than 2,000 digital ECGs from hospitals and databases in Europe, USA, and Australia, were obtained from consecutive adult and pediatric patients and converted to 10 s analog samples that were replayed on seven electrocardiographs and classified by the manufacturers' interpretation programs. We assessed ability to distinguish sinus rhythm from non-sinus rhythm, identify atrial fibrillation/flutter and other abnormal rhythms, and accuracy in flagging results for priority review. If all seven programs' interpretation statements did not agree, cases were reviewed by experienced cardiologists. Results: All programs could distinguish well between sinus and non-sinus rhythms and could identify atrial fibrillation/flutter or other abnormal rhythms. However, false-positive rates varied from 2.1% to 5.5% for non-sinus rhythm, from 0.7% to 4.4% for atrial fibrillation/flutter, and from 1.5% to 3.0% for other abnormal rhythms. False-negative rates varied from 12.0% to 7.5%, 9.9% to 2.7%, and 55.9% to 30.5%, respectively. Flagging of ACS varied by a factor of 2.5 between programs. Physicians flagged more ECGs for prompt review, but also showed variance of around a factor of 2. False-negative values differed between programs by a factor of 2 but was high for all (>50%). Agreement between programs and majority reviewer decisions was 46–62%. Conclusions: Automatic interpretations of rhythms and ACS differ between programs. Healthcare institutions should not rely on ECG software “critical result” flags alone to decide the ACS workflow.

Performance of seven ECG interpretation programs in identifying arrhythmia and acute cardiovascular syndrome

Massaro G.;Diemberger I.
2020

Abstract

Background: No direct comparison of current electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation programs exists. Objective: Assess the accuracy of ECG interpretation programs in detecting abnormal rhythms and flagging for priority review records with alterations secondary to acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: More than 2,000 digital ECGs from hospitals and databases in Europe, USA, and Australia, were obtained from consecutive adult and pediatric patients and converted to 10 s analog samples that were replayed on seven electrocardiographs and classified by the manufacturers' interpretation programs. We assessed ability to distinguish sinus rhythm from non-sinus rhythm, identify atrial fibrillation/flutter and other abnormal rhythms, and accuracy in flagging results for priority review. If all seven programs' interpretation statements did not agree, cases were reviewed by experienced cardiologists. Results: All programs could distinguish well between sinus and non-sinus rhythms and could identify atrial fibrillation/flutter or other abnormal rhythms. However, false-positive rates varied from 2.1% to 5.5% for non-sinus rhythm, from 0.7% to 4.4% for atrial fibrillation/flutter, and from 1.5% to 3.0% for other abnormal rhythms. False-negative rates varied from 12.0% to 7.5%, 9.9% to 2.7%, and 55.9% to 30.5%, respectively. Flagging of ACS varied by a factor of 2.5 between programs. Physicians flagged more ECGs for prompt review, but also showed variance of around a factor of 2. False-negative values differed between programs by a factor of 2 but was high for all (>50%). Agreement between programs and majority reviewer decisions was 46–62%. Conclusions: Automatic interpretations of rhythms and ACS differ between programs. Healthcare institutions should not rely on ECG software “critical result” flags alone to decide the ACS workflow.
De Bie J.; Martignani C.; Massaro G.; Diemberger I.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Performance_of_seven_ECG_interpretation_programs_i.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate (CCBYNCND)
Dimensione 822.28 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
822.28 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
1-s2.0-S0022073619306120-mmc1.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: File Supplementare
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate (CCBYNCND)
Dimensione 614.84 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
614.84 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11585/728204
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact