@article{article_434057, title={Is computer interpretation of “Normal ECG” reliable?}, journal={International Journal of Health Services Research and Policy}, volume={3}, pages={80–85}, year={2018}, DOI={10.23884/ijhsrp.2018.3.2.05}, author={Turgay Yıldırım, Özge and Çanakçı, Mustafa Emin}, keywords={Electrocardiography,Computer interpretation}, abstract={<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;"> <br /> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Background </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Electrocardiographs (ECG) taken on an emergency clinic
should be evaluated by emergency physician within 10 minutes. However, since
the number of emergency physicians is not sufficient, physicians have to look
at these ECGs during other patient examinations, which causes interruptions.
Today, most ECG devices have computer-based analysis systems. Our aim is to
determine how reliable the computer interpretations are to determine if
patients with “Normal ECG” also need immediate attention. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Methods </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">All triage ECGs from patients applied to Emergency
Clinic between 01.03.2018 and 31.03.2018 were evaluated. Patients under age of
18 were excluded. The ECGs computer interpreted as normal were evaluated by a
cardiologist and if the ECGs found to be abnormal, these ECGs were than
analyzed by an emergency specialist. Then these patients’ diagnosis, follow up
and treatment were obtained from the hospital records. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Results </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">A total of 1225 ECGs were evaluated. 27.8% (n=341)
were interpreted as “normal ECG” by the computer. From the ECGs which the
computer interpreted as normal, 18 (5.3%) of them were assessed by cardiologist
as “not normal”. These 18 ECGs were also assessed by emergency resident as
abnormal. According to these results negative predictive value of the computer
is 94.7% and sensitivity of the test was 98.0%. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">Conclusions </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal"> <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:107%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;">We investigated the reliability of "normal
ECG" evaluation of ECG devices in this study. Our study suggests that the
devices’ “normal ECG” assessment was reliable. This study should be repeated
with a larger study group on a longer period of time. </span> </p> <p> </p>}, number={2}, publisher={Rojan GÜMÜŞ}