Agreement in electrocardiogram interpretation in patients with septic shock

Critical Care Medicine

Volumn 39, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 2080-2086

  Mehta, Sangeeta ^a   Granton, John ^c   Lapinsky, Stephen E ^a   Newton, Gary ^b   Bandayrel, Kristofer ^a   Little, Anjuli ^a   Siau, Chuin ^d   Cook, Deborah J ^e   Ayers, Dieter ^f   Singer, Joel ^f   Lee, Terry C ^f   Walley, Keith R ^g   Storms, Michelle ^g   Cooper, Jamie ⁱ   Holmes, Cheryl L ^h   Hebert, Paul ^j   Gordon, Anthony C ^k   Presneill, Jeff ^l   Russell, James A ^g  

^a Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine   (Canada)

^b MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

^d CHANGI GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

^e MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^f CENTRE FOR HEALTH EVALUATION AND OUTCOME SCIENCES   (Canada)

^g ST PAUL S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^h UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

ⁱ MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^j UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^k CHARING CROSS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^l UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

more..

Author keywords

electrocardiogram; myocardial ischemia; norepinephrine; reliability; septic shock; vasopressin

Indexed keywords

NORADRENALIN; TROPONIN; VASOPRESSIN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CANADA; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; FLUID RESUSCITATION; HEART ATRIUM ARRHYTHMIA; HEART BUNDLE BRANCH BLOCK; HEART MUSCLE ISCHEMIA; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MORTALITY; MULTICENTER STUDY; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; Q WAVE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEPTIC SHOCK; ST SEGMENT ELEVATION; T WAVE INVERSION; TREATMENT DURATION;

EID: 80051934208     PISSN: 00903493     EISSN: 15300293     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318222720e     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Kress JP, Vinayak AG, Levitt J, et al: Daily sedative interruption in mechanically ventilated patients at risk for coronary artery disease. Crit Care Med 2007; 35:365-371 (Pubitemid 46148523)
2. Lim W, Holinski P, Devereaux PJ, et al: Detecting myocardial infarction in critical illness using screening troponin measurements and ECG recordings. Crit Care 2008; 12:R36
3. Fromm RE Jr: Cardiac troponins in the intensive care unit: Common causes of increased levels and interpretation. Crit Care Med 2007; 35:584-588 (Pubitemid 46148552)
4. Lim W, Qushmaq I, Cook DJ, et al: Reliability of electrocardiogram interpretation in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 1338-1343
5. Lim W, Tkaczyk A, Holinski P, et al: The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients: An agreement study. J Crit Care 2009; 24:447-452
6. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J, et al: Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:877-887 (Pubitemid 351397087)
7. Mehta S, Granton J, Cook DJ, et al: Troponin and CKMB trends in patients with septic shock randomized to Vasopressin (VP) or Norepinephrine (NE). Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009; 179:A1564
8. Altman DG: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman and Hall, London, 1991
9. Cook RJ, Farewell VT: Conditional inference for subject-specific and marginal agreement: Two families of agreement measures. Can J Stat 1995; 23:333-344 (Pubitemid 126036809)
10. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ: An Introduction to the Bootstrap. London, Chapman and Hall, 1993
11. Morrow DA: Clinical application of sensitive troponin assays. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 913-915
12. Frazier SK, Brom H, Widener J, et al: Prevalence of myocardial ischemia during mechanical ventilation and weaning and its effects on weaning success. Heart Lung 2006; 35:363-373 (Pubitemid 44809458)
13. Vijayaraghavan R, Yan AT, Tan M, et al: Local hospital vs. core-laboratory interpretation of the admission electrocardiogram in acute coronary syndromes: Increased mortality in patients with unrecognized ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2008; 29:31-37
14. Yan RT, Yan AT, Allegrone J, et al: Differences between local hospital and core laboratory interpretation of the admission electrocardiogram in patients with acute coronary syndromes and their relation to outcome. Am J Cardiol 2007; 100:169-174 (Pubitemid 47049631)
15. Massardo T, Lavados H, Jaimovich R, et al: [Agreement between observers with different experience in the interpretation of the stress myocardial perfusion electrocardiogram in SPECT.] Rev Esp Med Nucl 2009; 28:278-282
16. Holmvang L, Hasbak P, Clemmensen P, et al: Differences between local investigator and core laboratory interpretation of the admission electrocardiogram in patients with unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (a Thrombin Inhibition in Myocardial Ischemia [TRIM] substudy). Am J Cardiol 1998; 82: 54-60 (Pubitemid 28322035)
17. Massel D, Dawdy JA, Melendez LJ: Strict reliance on a computer algorithm or measurable ST segment criteria may lead to errors in thrombolytic therapy eligibility. Am Heart J 2000; 140:221-226 (Pubitemid 30641582)
18. Sur DK, Kaye L, Mikus M, et al: Accuracy of electrocardiogram reading by family practice residents. Fam Med 2000; 32:315-319 (Pubitemid 30304774)
19. Mele P: Improving electrocardiogram interpretation in the clinical setting. J Electrocardiol 2008; 41:438-439
20. Engel TR: Electrocardiographic diagnosis of coronary syndromes in the critical care unit. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:1546-1547
21. Salerno SM, Alguire PC, Waxman HS: Training and competency evaluation for interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiograms: Recommendations from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:747-750 (Pubitemid 38129137)
22. Salerno SM, Alguire PC, Waxman HS: Competency in interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiograms: A summary and appraisal of published evidence. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:751-760 (Pubitemid 38129138)