OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the project was to study the impact that immediate physician electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation would have on door-to-balloon times in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as compared with computer-interpreted ECGs. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 340 consecutive patients from September 2003 to December 2009 with STEMI who underwent emergent cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on the computer-interpreted ECG interpretation: those with acute myocardial infarction identified by the computer interpretation and those not identified as acute myocardial infarction. Patients (n = 173) from September 2003 to June 2006 had their initial ECG reviewed by the triage nurse, while patients from July 2006 to December 2009 (n = 167) had their ECG reviewed by the emergency department physician within 10 minutes. Times for catheterization laboratory activation and percutaneous coronary intervention were recorded in all patients. RESULTS: Of the 340 patients with confirmed STEMI, 102 (30%) patients were not identified by computer interpretation. Comparing the prior protocol of computer ECG to physician interpretation, the latter resulted in significant improvements in median catheterization laboratory activation time {19 minutes [interquartile range (IQR): 10-37] vs. 16 minutes [IQR: 8-29]; P < 0.029} and in median door-to-balloon time [113 minutes (IQR: 86-143) vs. 85 minutes (IQR: 62-106); P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: The computer-interpreted ECG failed to identify a significant number of patients with STEMI. The immediate review of ECGs by an emergency physician led to faster activation of the catheterization laboratory, and door-to-balloon times in patients with STEMI.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the project was to study the impact that immediate physician electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation would have on door-to-balloon times in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as compared with computer-interpreted ECGs. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 340 consecutive patients from September 2003 to December 2009 with STEMI who underwent emergent cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on the computer-interpreted ECG interpretation: those with acute myocardial infarction identified by the computer interpretation and those not identified as acute myocardial infarction. Patients (n = 173) from September 2003 to June 2006 had their initial ECG reviewed by the triage nurse, while patients from July 2006 to December 2009 (n = 167) had their ECG reviewed by the emergency department physician within 10 minutes. Times for catheterization laboratory activation and percutaneous coronary intervention were recorded in all patients. RESULTS: Of the 340 patients with confirmed STEMI, 102 (30%) patients were not identified by computer interpretation. Comparing the prior protocol of computer ECG to physician interpretation, the latter resulted in significant improvements in median catheterization laboratory activation time {19 minutes [interquartile range (IQR): 10-37] vs. 16 minutes [IQR: 8-29]; P < 0.029} and in median door-to-balloon time [113 minutes (IQR: 86-143) vs. 85 minutes (IQR: 62-106); P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: The computer-interpreted ECG failed to identify a significant number of patients with STEMI. The immediate review of ECGs by an emergency physician led to faster activation of the catheterization laboratory, and door-to-balloon times in patients with STEMI.
Authors: Anthony H Kashou; Wei-Yin Ko; Zachi I Attia; Michal S Cohen; Paul A Friedman; Peter A Noseworthy Journal: Cardiovasc Digit Health J Date: 2020-09-08
Authors: S S Anroedh; I Kardys; K M Akkerhuis; M Biekart; B van der Hulst; G J Deddens; P Smits; M Gardien; E Dubois; F Zijlstra; E Boersma Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.380