Snoey E R, Housset B, Guyon P, ElHaddad S, Valty J, Hericord P
Department of Emergency Medicine, Hospital Saint-Antoine, Paris, France.
J Accid Emerg Med. 1994 Sep;11(3):149-53. doi: 10.1136/emj.11.3.149.
The objective of the study was to determine the concordance of emergency physicians' and cardiologists' interpretations of emergency department (ED) electrocardiograms (ECG), to evaluate the impact of ECG misinterpretation on patient management, and to determine error rates as a function of the level of physician training and the specific ECG diagnoses. ECG interpretations were registered prospectively using a programmed-response data sheet. A second blinded interpretation by a staff cardiologist was assumed to be correct. Only ECG discrepancies with potential or probable clinical importance were considered as errors. The ED management of patients with ECG misinterpretations was reviewed by the investigators. The study was performed at an urban university hospital using 300 consecutive ED ECGs. The analysis found 154 errors of interpretation of which nine had probable clinical significance, and 56 had indeterminant significance. The concordance was weak at 0.69 (Kappa = 0.32, weighted Kappa = 0.30) with a significant discordance (McNemar Chi 2:P < 0.05). Error rates did not differ significantly between the diverse categories of physicians. In two cases, interpretation errors impacted patient management decisions but not patient outcomes. The most frequent errors involved repolarization abnormalities, ventricular hypertrophy and hemi-blocks. While discordance was significant, errors in ECG interpretation rarely impacted patient management. Prospective evaluation of ECG interpretation may be a useful means of gauging physician skills. It can also serve to focus educational activities on problem areas in electrocardiography.
该研究的目的是确定急诊医生和心脏病专家对急诊科(ED)心电图(ECG)解读的一致性,评估心电图误读对患者管理的影响,并确定作为医生培训水平和特定心电图诊断函数的错误率。使用程序化反应数据表前瞻性地记录心电图解读情况。假定由心脏病专家工作人员进行的第二次盲法解读是正确的。仅将具有潜在或可能临床重要性的心电图差异视为错误。研究人员审查了心电图误读患者的急诊处理情况。该研究在一家城市大学医院进行,使用了300份连续的急诊科心电图。分析发现154例解读错误,其中9例具有可能的临床意义,56例具有不确定意义。一致性较弱,为0.69(卡帕=0.32,加权卡帕=0.30),存在显著不一致(麦克内马尔卡方检验:P<0.05)。不同类别的医生之间错误率没有显著差异。在两例中,解读错误影响了患者管理决策,但未影响患者结局。最常见的错误涉及复极异常、心室肥大和半阻滞。虽然不一致很显著,但心电图解读错误很少影响患者管理。对心电图解读进行前瞻性评估可能是衡量医生技能的有用方法。它还可用于将教育活动集中在心电图问题领域。