Abstract
One hundred fifteen ECGs from a hospital service were interpreted by 2 primary care physicians and 2 expert electrocardiographers. When their interpretations were compared with one another and with the Marquette MAC II ECG Interpretation Program, there was great variability. Computer ECG interpretations appeared to benefit primary care physicians most by providing a backup opinion. This second opinion was also of use to expert electrocardiographers. Additional long-term benefits that may be derived from computer systems include improvement of physician interpretation ability, reduction in interpretation time, and standardization of electrocardiographic nomenclature and criteria. (J Am Bd Fam Pract 1989; 2:17-24.)
