The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients

An agreement study

Wendy Lim, Andrea Tkaczyk, Paula Holinski, Ismael Qushmaq, Michael Jacka, Vikas Khera, P. J. Devereaux, Irene Terrenato, Holger Schunemann, Diane Heels-Ansdell, Mark Crowther, Deborah Cook

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess agreement among 4 intensivists in diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI) in critically ill patients based on screening electrocardiograms (ECGs) and cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted to a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) underwent systematic screening with 12-lead ECGs and cTn measurements throughout their ICU stay. Independently, 4 raters interpreted the ECGs assessing for changes indicative of ischemia and then classified each patient as to whether they met diagnostic criteria for MI based on the screening cTn measurements and ECG results. A priori, 2 raters were designated the primary adjudicators, and their consensus was used as the reference for the agreement statistics. Agreement on MI diagnosis was calculated for the 4 raters and expressed as raw agreement, κ (chance-corrected agreement) and φ{symbol} (chance-independent agreement, calculated using pairs). Results: Among 103 enrolled patients, 37 (35.9%) had MI according to the primary adjudicators. The raw agreement for diagnosing MI was 79% (substantial), κ was 0.24 (fair), and φ{symbol} ranged from 0.12 to 0.73 (slight to substantial). Conclusions: Diagnosing MI in the ICU remains a challenge due to variable agreement in 12-lead ECG interpretation. Such variation in practice may contribute to underrecognition of MI during critical illness.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)447-452
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Critical Care
Volume24
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2009

Fingerprint

Critical Illness
Myocardial Infarction
Electrocardiography
Troponin
Intensive Care Units
Critical Care
Ischemia

Keywords

  • Critical illness
  • Decision making
  • Electrocardiography
  • Intensive care unit
  • Troponin

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Lim, W., Tkaczyk, A., Holinski, P., Qushmaq, I., Jacka, M., Khera, V., ... Cook, D. (2009). The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients: An agreement study. Journal of Critical Care, 24(3), 447-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.08.012

The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients : An agreement study. / Lim, Wendy; Tkaczyk, Andrea; Holinski, Paula; Qushmaq, Ismael; Jacka, Michael; Khera, Vikas; Devereaux, P. J.; Terrenato, Irene; Schunemann, Holger; Heels-Ansdell, Diane; Crowther, Mark; Cook, Deborah.

In: Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 24, No. 3, 09.2009, p. 447-452.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lim, W, Tkaczyk, A, Holinski, P, Qushmaq, I, Jacka, M, Khera, V, Devereaux, PJ, Terrenato, I, Schunemann, H, Heels-Ansdell, D, Crowther, M & Cook, D 2009, 'The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients: An agreement study', Journal of Critical Care, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 447-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.08.012
Lim, Wendy ; Tkaczyk, Andrea ; Holinski, Paula ; Qushmaq, Ismael ; Jacka, Michael ; Khera, Vikas ; Devereaux, P. J. ; Terrenato, Irene ; Schunemann, Holger ; Heels-Ansdell, Diane ; Crowther, Mark ; Cook, Deborah. / The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients : An agreement study. In: Journal of Critical Care. 2009 ; Vol. 24, No. 3. pp. 447-452.
@article{549493dd131a4cb098fe9a97003f738a,
title = "The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients: An agreement study",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess agreement among 4 intensivists in diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI) in critically ill patients based on screening electrocardiograms (ECGs) and cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted to a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) underwent systematic screening with 12-lead ECGs and cTn measurements throughout their ICU stay. Independently, 4 raters interpreted the ECGs assessing for changes indicative of ischemia and then classified each patient as to whether they met diagnostic criteria for MI based on the screening cTn measurements and ECG results. A priori, 2 raters were designated the primary adjudicators, and their consensus was used as the reference for the agreement statistics. Agreement on MI diagnosis was calculated for the 4 raters and expressed as raw agreement, κ (chance-corrected agreement) and φ{symbol} (chance-independent agreement, calculated using pairs). Results: Among 103 enrolled patients, 37 (35.9{\%}) had MI according to the primary adjudicators. The raw agreement for diagnosing MI was 79{\%} (substantial), κ was 0.24 (fair), and φ{symbol} ranged from 0.12 to 0.73 (slight to substantial). Conclusions: Diagnosing MI in the ICU remains a challenge due to variable agreement in 12-lead ECG interpretation. Such variation in practice may contribute to underrecognition of MI during critical illness.",
keywords = "Critical illness, Decision making, Electrocardiography, Intensive care unit, Troponin",
author = "Wendy Lim and Andrea Tkaczyk and Paula Holinski and Ismael Qushmaq and Michael Jacka and Vikas Khera and Devereaux, {P. J.} and Irene Terrenato and Holger Schunemann and Diane Heels-Ansdell and Mark Crowther and Deborah Cook",
year = "2009",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.08.012",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "447--452",
journal = "Journal of Critical Care",
issn = "0883-9441",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The diagnosis of myocardial infarction in critically ill patients

T2 - An agreement study

AU - Lim, Wendy

AU - Tkaczyk, Andrea

AU - Holinski, Paula

AU - Qushmaq, Ismael

AU - Jacka, Michael

AU - Khera, Vikas

AU - Devereaux, P. J.

AU - Terrenato, Irene

AU - Schunemann, Holger

AU - Heels-Ansdell, Diane

AU - Crowther, Mark

AU - Cook, Deborah

PY - 2009/9

Y1 - 2009/9

N2 - Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess agreement among 4 intensivists in diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI) in critically ill patients based on screening electrocardiograms (ECGs) and cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted to a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) underwent systematic screening with 12-lead ECGs and cTn measurements throughout their ICU stay. Independently, 4 raters interpreted the ECGs assessing for changes indicative of ischemia and then classified each patient as to whether they met diagnostic criteria for MI based on the screening cTn measurements and ECG results. A priori, 2 raters were designated the primary adjudicators, and their consensus was used as the reference for the agreement statistics. Agreement on MI diagnosis was calculated for the 4 raters and expressed as raw agreement, κ (chance-corrected agreement) and φ{symbol} (chance-independent agreement, calculated using pairs). Results: Among 103 enrolled patients, 37 (35.9%) had MI according to the primary adjudicators. The raw agreement for diagnosing MI was 79% (substantial), κ was 0.24 (fair), and φ{symbol} ranged from 0.12 to 0.73 (slight to substantial). Conclusions: Diagnosing MI in the ICU remains a challenge due to variable agreement in 12-lead ECG interpretation. Such variation in practice may contribute to underrecognition of MI during critical illness.

AB - Purpose: The aim of the study was to assess agreement among 4 intensivists in diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI) in critically ill patients based on screening electrocardiograms (ECGs) and cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted to a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) underwent systematic screening with 12-lead ECGs and cTn measurements throughout their ICU stay. Independently, 4 raters interpreted the ECGs assessing for changes indicative of ischemia and then classified each patient as to whether they met diagnostic criteria for MI based on the screening cTn measurements and ECG results. A priori, 2 raters were designated the primary adjudicators, and their consensus was used as the reference for the agreement statistics. Agreement on MI diagnosis was calculated for the 4 raters and expressed as raw agreement, κ (chance-corrected agreement) and φ{symbol} (chance-independent agreement, calculated using pairs). Results: Among 103 enrolled patients, 37 (35.9%) had MI according to the primary adjudicators. The raw agreement for diagnosing MI was 79% (substantial), κ was 0.24 (fair), and φ{symbol} ranged from 0.12 to 0.73 (slight to substantial). Conclusions: Diagnosing MI in the ICU remains a challenge due to variable agreement in 12-lead ECG interpretation. Such variation in practice may contribute to underrecognition of MI during critical illness.

KW - Critical illness

KW - Decision making

KW - Electrocardiography

KW - Intensive care unit

KW - Troponin

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67949100649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67949100649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.08.012

DO - 10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.08.012

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 447

EP - 452

JO - Journal of Critical Care

JF - Journal of Critical Care

SN - 0883-9441

IS - 3

ER -