Evaluating the Modified American Academy of Pediatrics Screening Algorithm for Critical Congenital Heart Disease.

In 2018, an expert panel recommended two key modifications to the most used algorithm for screening neonates for critical congenital heart disease (CCHD). Our aim was to evaluate the outcomes of the modified algorithm compared with those of the original algorithm in a real-world setting.We compared the performance characteristics of an original CCHD algorithm used to screen term neonates at a large hospital system between October 26, 2018, and October 15, 2020, and the recommended modified algorithm used between October 15, 2020, and June 30, 2022. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, proportion of false positives with non-CCHD illness, and error rates of test administration and interpretation for each algorithm.Sensitivity was not significantly different between the modified algorithm compared with the original algorithm (40.00 vs. 12.50%,  ≥0.99), but specificity was lower (and hence false positive rate was higher) in the modified algorithm (99.91 vs. 99.98%,  < 0.001). Despite a higher false positive rate in the modified algorithm, the proportion of false positives with significant non-CCHD illness was similar (36.47 vs. 28.57%,  ≥0.99), a finding that translated to an increase in the number of cases of significant non-CCHD illness detected (11 cases out of 32,178 screens vs. 2 cases out of 32,984 screens). Error rates of test administration and interpretation were similar between the two algorithms.In this limited study, the modified algorithm for CCHD screening using pulse oximetry had a higher false positive rate than that of the original American Academy of Pediatrics algorithm. However, this higher rate led to an increased overall number of cases detected of significant non-CCHD illness. · Experts recommend two changes to the American Academy of Pediatrics-endorsed CCHD screen.. · This study evaluates the new algorithm for screening.. · The new algorithm detects at least as many cases as the original.. · There was no significant difference in test sensitivity for CCHD.. · The new algorithm has a statistically higher false positive rate..