Erroneous computer-based interpretations of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in a Swedish primary health care setting

Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019 Dec;37(4):426-433. doi: 10.1080/02813432.2019.1684429. Epub 2019 Nov 4.

Abstract

Objective: To describe the incidence of incorrect computerized ECG interpretations of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter in a Swedish primary care population, the rate of correction of computer misinterpretations, and the consequences of misdiagnosis.Design: Retrospective expert re-analysis of ECGs with a computer-suggested diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter.Setting: Primary health care in Region Kronoberg, Sweden.Subjects: All adult patients who had an ECG recorded between January 2016 and June 2016 with a computer statement including the words 'atrial fibrillation' or 'atrial flutter'.Main outcome measures: Number of incorrect computer interpretations of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter; rate of correction by the interpreting primary care physician; consequences of misdiagnosis of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter.Results: Among 988 ECGs with a computer diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, 89 (9.0%) were incorrect, among which 36 were not corrected by the interpreting physician. In 12 cases, misdiagnosed atrial fibrillation/flutter led to inappropriate treatment with anticoagulant therapy. A larger proportion of atrial flutters, 27 out of 80 (34%), than atrial fibrillations, 62 out of 908 (7%), were incorrectly diagnosed by the computer.Conclusions: Among ECGs with a computer-based diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, the diagnosis was incorrect in almost 10%. In almost half of the cases, the misdiagnosis was not corrected by the overreading primary-care physician. Twelve patients received inappropriate anticoagulant treatment as a result of misdiagnosis.Key pointsData regarding the incidence of misdiagnosed atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter in primary care are lacking. In a Swedish primary care setting, computer-based ECG interpretations of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter were incorrect in 89 of 988 (9.0%) consecutive cases.Incorrect computer diagnoses of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter were not corrected by the primary-care physician in 47% of cases.In 12 of the cases with an incorrect computer rhythm diagnosis, misdiagnosed atrial fibrillation or flutter led to inappropriate treatment with anticoagulant therapy.

Keywords: ECG; atrial fibrillation; atrial flutter; cardiovascular disease; computer-based interpretation.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Atrial Fibrillation / diagnosis*
  • Atrial Flutter / diagnosis*
  • Diagnostic Errors / statistics & numerical data*
  • Electrocardiography / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / standards*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Primary Health Care
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Sweden
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

This research has received funding from the Department of Research and Development, Region Kronoberg, Sweden; Department of Clinical Physiology, Växjö Central Hospital, Växjö, Sweden.