Veronese Giacomo, Germini Federico, Ingrassia Stella, Cutuli Ombretta, Donati Valeria, Bonacchini Luca, Marcucci Maura, Fabbri Andrea
a Department of Emergency Medicine , ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, University of Milano-Bicocca , Milan , Italy.
b Geriatric Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico , Milan , Italy.
Acute Card Care. 2016 Mar;18(1):7-10. doi: 10.1080/17482941.2016.1234058. Epub 2016 Oct 19.
Electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation is widely performed by emergency physicians. We aimed to determine the accuracy of interpretation of potential ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) ECGs by emergency physicians.
Thirty-six ECGs resulted in putative STEMI diagnoses were selected. Participants were asked to focus on whether or not the ECG in question met the diagnostic criteria for an acutely blocked coronary artery causing a STEMI. Based on the coronary angiogram, a binary outcome of accurate versus inaccurate ECG interpretation was defined. We computed the overall sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for ECG interpretation. Data on participant training level, working experience and place were collected.
135 participants interpreted 4603 ECGs. Overall sensitivity to identify 'true' STEMI ECGs was 64.5% (95%CI: 62.8-66.3); specificity in determining 'false' ECGs was 78% (95%CI: 76-80.1). Overall accuracy was modest (69.1, 95%CI: 67.8-70.4). Higher accuracy in ECG interpretation was observed for attending physicians, participants working in tertiary care hospitals and those more experienced.
The accuracy of interpretation of potential STEMI ECGs was modest among emergency physicians. The study supports the notion that ECG interpretation for establishing a STEMI diagnosis lacks the necessary sensitivity and specificity to be considered a reliable 'stand-alone' diagnostic test.
心电图(ECG)解读在急诊医生中广泛开展。我们旨在确定急诊医生对潜在ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)心电图解读的准确性。
选取36份诊断为疑似STEMI的心电图。要求参与者关注所讨论的心电图是否符合急性冠状动脉阻塞导致STEMI的诊断标准。根据冠状动脉造影,定义心电图解读准确与不准确的二元结果。我们计算了心电图解读的总体敏感性、特异性、准确性和95%置信区间(95%CI)。收集了参与者的培训水平、工作经验和工作地点的数据。
135名参与者解读了4603份心电图。识别“真正”STEMI心电图的总体敏感性为64.5%(95%CI:62.8 - 66.3);判定“假”心电图的特异性为78%(95%CI:76 - 80.1)。总体准确性一般(69.1,95%CI:67.8 - 70.4)。在主治医生、三级医院工作的参与者以及经验更丰富的参与者中,心电图解读的准确性更高。
急诊医生对潜在STEMI心电图解读的准确性一般。该研究支持这样一种观点,即用于确立STEMI诊断的心电图解读缺乏必要的敏感性和特异性,不能被视为可靠的“独立”诊断测试。