|Title:||Comparison of ECG interpretation between autoanalyzer and cardiologist
|Issue Date:||1994||Start page/Pages:||-||Source:||JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, R.O.C. v.5 n.1 pp.23-28||Abstract:||
Computed electrocardiography has so far made great contribution to the filing, storage and comparision of electrocardiogram. But there still exists system bias and inaccuracy between different automatic ECG analyzers. To understand the accuracy of ECG interpretation of automated electrocardiographer (Marquette Electronic, USA), we compare the 1948 ECG reports from out-and in-hospital patdients, interpreted seperately by Marquette ECG autoanalyzer and cardiologists. There are 820 abnormal ECG's (42%) and 1128 normal ECG's (58%) read by autoanalyzer. Among the normal ECG's, 1119 cases (99%) are compatible with the interpretaton made by cardiologists; 9 cases (1%) are not compatible. Among the abnormal ECG's, 611 cases (75%) are compatible with the interpretation made by cardiologists; while 209 cases (25%) are not compatible (x=288.76, p<0. 0001 ). Thus we conclude that computed ECG analyzer is suitable for the field screening or routine work, but the interpretation for abnormal ECG's i.e. myocardial infarction , ventricular extrasystole, atrial arrhythmia, digitalis effect and biventricular hypertrophy ect. is not hood enough and awaits fur ther studies by medical engineers and cardiologists.#0047#
|Appears in Collections:||醫學系|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.