Littmann L. Common ECG
interpretation software mistakes. Part I: False reporting of myocardial infarction.
J Electrocardiol 2023;
81:32-35. [PMID:
37517198 DOI:
10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2023.07.011]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 08/01/2023]
Abstract
The purpose of computerized analysis of electrocardiograms (ECGs) is to provide rapid interpretation in places where ECG experts are not available, and to save physician time for all providers. For the most part, contemporary interpretation algorithms perform remarkably well and offer correct diagnoses of common ECG abnormalities. Diagnostic accuracy for myocardial ischemia and infarction is reasonably good but with these conditions, false positive and false negative readings can be disastrous. It is essential, therefore, that computerized statements be over-read by trained physicians. A three-part mini-series is intended to provide assistance to quickly recognize and correct common interpretation software mistakes. This first chapter presents interpretation errors that falsely indicate myocardial infarction.
Collapse