Emergency physician accuracy in interpreting electrocardiograms with potential ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Is it enough?

Background: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusion: 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.

[1]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Strategies for reducing the door-to-balloon time in acute myocardial infarction. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  R. Eckel,et al.  Coming together to achieve quality cardiovascular care. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  S. Pinski,et al.  Use of the prehospital ECG improves door-to-balloon times in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction irrespective of time of day or day of week , 2007, Emergency Medicine Journal.

[4]  H. Krumholz,et al.  A campaign to improve the timeliness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention: Door-to-Balloon: An Alliance for Quality. , 2008, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[5]  D. Cone,et al.  Can Paramedics Read ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction on Prehospital 12-Lead Electrocardiograms? , 2009, Prehospital emergency care : official journal of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the National Association of State EMS Directors.

[6]  Y. Lim,et al.  “False-positive” cardiac catheterization laboratory activation among patients with suspected ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction , 2009 .

[7]  J. Ornato,et al.  An evaluation of the accuracy of emergency physician activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory for patients with suspected ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. , 2010, Annals of emergency medicine.

[8]  An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Emergency Physician Activation of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory for Patients With Suspected ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction , 2010 .

[9]  Kurt S. Hoffmayer,et al.  Prevalence and factors associated with false-positive ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction diagnoses at primary percutaneous coronary intervention–capable centers: a report from the Activate-SF registry. , 2012, Archives of internal medicine.

[10]  D. Atar,et al.  ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Presenting With ST-Segment Elevation , 2013 .

[11]  Kurt S. Hoffmayer,et al.  Physician Accuracy in Interpreting Potential ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Electrocardiograms , 2013, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[12]  S. Lavi,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction by various healthcare providers. , 2014, International journal of cardiology.