The coming of age of computerized ECG processing: can it replace the cardiologist in epidemiological studies and clinical trials?

In spite of decades of research and widespread use of computer programs for the analysis of electrocardiograms (ECGs), the accuracy and usefulness of computerized ECG processing has been questioned. To determine whether ECG computer programs can replace cardiologists in epidemiological studies and clinical trials, we reviewed the literature for evidence, concentrating on one influential ECG measurement, viz. QT interval duration, and one classification method, the Minnesota Code, which is the de facto standard for ECG coding. We compared interobserver variabilities of cardiologists with differences between computer programs and cardiologists, in order not to prejudice against the computer. Studies that contain this type of information indicate that interobserver variabilities are at least as large as differences between computer and cardiologist. This suggests that ECG computer programs perform at least equally well as human observers in ECG measurement and coding, and can replace the cardiologist in epidemiological studies and clinical trials.