PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 2390144

Electrocardiograph interpretation by junior doctors.

W G Morrison·I J Swann
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The object of this study was to assess the ability of junior doctors in the accident and emergency department to detect electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities. The ECG's performed in this department were monitored over a 4 week period. The initial diagnosis by the accident and emergency doctor was compared with the report from the cardiologist on 126 ECG's which showed abnormalities. The error rate was 19.8%. Of those abnormalities which were graded as clinically significant only 2 (4.4%) were missed. The danger of missing acute changes is emphasized and proposals discussed which may reduce their frequency.

Explore related subjects

Clinical CompetenceDiagnostic ErrorsElectrocardiographyEmergency Service, HospitalEvaluation Studies as TopicHeart DiseasesHumansMedical Staff, HospitalJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W G Morrison, I J Swann. 1990. Electrocardiograph interpretation by junior doctors.. https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.7.2.108

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

The role of primary healthcare professionals in oral cancer prevention and detection.

AIM: To investigate current knowledge, examination habits and preventive practices of primary healthcare professionals in Scotland, with respect to oral cancer, and to determine any relevant training needs. SETTING: Primary care. METHOD: Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of 357 general medical practitioners (GMPs) and 331 dental practitioners throughout Scotland. Additionally, focus group research and interviews were conducted amongst primary healthcare team members. RESULTS: Whilst 58% of dental respondents reported examining regularly for signs of oral cancer, GMPs examined patients' mouths usually in response to a complaint of soreness. The majority of GMPs (85%) and dentists (63%) indicated that they felt less than confident in detecting oral cancer, with over 70% of GMPs identifying lack of training as an important barrier. Many practitioners were unclear concerning the relative importance of the presence of potentially malignant lesions in the oral cavity. A high proportion of the GMPs indicated that they should have a major role to play in oral cancer detection (66%) but many felt strongly that this should be primarily the remit of the dental team. CONCLUSION: The study revealed a need for continuing education programmes for primary care practitioners in oral cancer-related activities. This should aim to improve diagnostic skills and seek to increase practitioners' participation in preventive activities.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2003

NVQs.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Clinical Competence↗