Do medical practitioners trust automated ...
Type de document :
Article dans une revue scientifique: Article original
DOI :
PMID :
URL permanente :
Titre :
Do medical practitioners trust automated interpretation of electrocardiograms?
Auteur(s) :
Delrot, Cedric [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Bouzille, Guillaume [Auteur]
Laboratoire Traitement du Signal et de l'Image [LTSI]
Calafiore, Matthieu [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Rochoy, Michael [Auteur]
Troubles cognitifs dégénératifs et vasculaires - U 1171 - EA 1046 [TCDV]
Legrand, Bertrand [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Ficheur, Gregoire [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Chazard, Emmanuel [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Bouzille, Guillaume [Auteur]
Laboratoire Traitement du Signal et de l'Image [LTSI]
Calafiore, Matthieu [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Rochoy, Michael [Auteur]
Troubles cognitifs dégénératifs et vasculaires - U 1171 - EA 1046 [TCDV]
Legrand, Bertrand [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Ficheur, Gregoire [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Chazard, Emmanuel [Auteur]
Evaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales - ULR 2694 [METRICS]
Titre de la revue :
Studies in health technology and informatics
Nom court de la revue :
Stud Health Technol Inform
Numéro :
264
Pagination :
536-540
Date de publication :
2019-08-21
ISSN :
1879-8365
Discipline(s) HAL :
Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]
Résumé en anglais : [en]
The objective is to study the way physicians use the ECG computerized interpretation (ECG-CI). Anonymous questionnaires were mailed to 282 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 140 cardiologists in France. 225 complete surveys ...
Lire la suite >The objective is to study the way physicians use the ECG computerized interpretation (ECG-CI). Anonymous questionnaires were mailed to 282 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 140 cardiologists in France. 225 complete surveys were analyzed. PCPs performed a median of 5 ECGs per month, vs. 200 ECGs for cardiologists. Among PCPs with ECG, 57% felt confident about their skills in interpreting ECGs. Whereas 91.7% of cardiologists first interpreted the ECG by themselves, 27.9% of PCPs first read the computerized interpretation. PCPs found that ECG-CI was more reliable than cardiologists did for atrial or ventricular hypertrophy. PCPs and cardiologists agreed that ECG-CI was reliable for conduction troubles and "normal ECG" statement, but was not for other rhythm or repolarization troubles. PCPs are less experienced with ECG interpretation, but are also more likely to trust the computerized interpretation, whereas those interpreters are not fully reliable.Lire moins >
Lire la suite >The objective is to study the way physicians use the ECG computerized interpretation (ECG-CI). Anonymous questionnaires were mailed to 282 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 140 cardiologists in France. 225 complete surveys were analyzed. PCPs performed a median of 5 ECGs per month, vs. 200 ECGs for cardiologists. Among PCPs with ECG, 57% felt confident about their skills in interpreting ECGs. Whereas 91.7% of cardiologists first interpreted the ECG by themselves, 27.9% of PCPs first read the computerized interpretation. PCPs found that ECG-CI was more reliable than cardiologists did for atrial or ventricular hypertrophy. PCPs and cardiologists agreed that ECG-CI was reliable for conduction troubles and "normal ECG" statement, but was not for other rhythm or repolarization troubles. PCPs are less experienced with ECG interpretation, but are also more likely to trust the computerized interpretation, whereas those interpreters are not fully reliable.Lire moins >
Langue :
Anglais
Audience :
Internationale
Vulgarisation :
Non
Établissement(s) :
CHU Lille
Université de Lille
Université de Lille
Date de dépôt :
2019-12-09T16:47:56Z
2021-05-31T09:49:27Z
2021-05-31T09:49:27Z