• Ayşe Birsu Topcugil Kırık, Oğuz Yüksel, Hüseyin Dursun, İnci Tuğçe Çöllüoğlu, Tuğba Kocahan, and Dayimi Kaya.
• Dokuz Eylül University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Sports Medicine - İzmir, Turkey.
• Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2023 Jan 1; 69 (11): e20230476e20230476.

ObjectivePreparticipation screening of athletes by electrocardiography is the most crucial step in determining sudden cardiac death risk factors. Several electrocardiography interpretation software programs have been developed for physicians practicing in this field. Our study aimed to assess cardiopoint sudden death screening module by comparing its findings with two cardiologists using Seattle and International criteria.MethodsA total of 303 licensed national athletes (37% females) were enrolled. electrocardiographies were examined by the cardiopoint sudden death screening module using Seattle criteria and cardiologists. The consistency between cardiologists and software was compared, and the confidence assessment of the module was tested.ResultsWith regard to Seattle criteria, moderate consistency was found between the cardiopoint sudden death screening module and the 1st (κ=0.41) and 2nd cardiologist (κ=0.59). Consistency between two cardiologists was moderate (κ=0.55). When we applied International criteria, there was moderate consistency between the module and the 1st cardiologist (κ=0.42), and good consistency between the module and the 2nd cardiologist (κ=0.63). Consistency between the two cardiologists was good (κ=0.62).ConclusionThe cardiopoint sudden death screening module had similar agreement with cardiologists based on both criteria. However, the software needs to be updated according to International criteria. Using computer-based measurements for preparticipation screening will help to save time and provide standardization of electrocardiography interpretation.

13 keywords...

hide…