Can Orthopaedic Surgeons adequately assess an Electrocardiogram (ECG) trace paper? A cross sectional study

Ahmed A Khalifa; Shimaa S Khidr; Ahmed Abdelazim A Hassan; Heba M Mohammed; Mohammad El-Sharkawi; Amr A Fadle

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22617

Can Orthopaedic Surgeons adequately assess an Electrocardiogram (ECG) trace paper? A cross sectional study

Heliyon. 2023 Nov 20;9(12):e22617. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22617. eCollection 2023 Dec.

Authors

Ahmed A Khalifa¹, Shimaa S Khidr², Ahmed Abdelazim A Hassan³, Heba M Mohammed⁴, Mohammad El-Sharkawi³, Amr A Fadle³

Affiliations

¹ Orthopaedic Department, Qena Faculty of Medicine, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt.
² Cardiology Department, Assiut University Hospital, Assiut, Egypt.
³ Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Department, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.
⁴ Public Health and Community Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective was to evaluate the ECG trace paper evaluation current knowledge level in a group of Orthopaedic surgeons divided into juniors and seniors according to M.D. degree possession.

Methods: A cross sectional study through self-administered questionnaires at a university hospital Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Department. The questionnaire included five sections: 1-Basic participants' characteristics, 2-Participants' perception of their ECG evaluation current knowledge level, 3-The main body of the questionnaire was an ECG quiz (seven); the participant was asked to determine if it was normal and the possible diagnosis, 4-Participants' desired ECG evaluation knowledge level, and 5-Willingness to attend ECG evaluation workshops.

Results: Of the 121 actively working individuals in the department, 96 (97.3 %) finished the questionnaire, and 85 (77.3 %) were valid for final evaluation. The participants' mean age was 30.4 ± 6.92 years, 76.5 % juniors and 23.5 % seniors. 83.5 % of the participants perceived their current ECG evaluation knowledge as none or limited. For participants' ability to evaluate an ECG, higher scores were achieved when determining if the ECG was normal or abnormal, with a mean score percentage of 79.32 % ± 23.27. However, the scores were lower when trying to reach the diagnosis, with a mean score percentage of 43.02 % ± 27.48. There was a significant negative correlation between the participant's age and answering the normality question correctly (r = -0.277, p = 0.01); and a significant positive correlation between answering the diagnosis question correctly and the desired level of knowledge and the intention to attend a workshop about ECG evaluation, r = 0.355 (p = 0.001), and r = 0.223 (p = 0.04), respectively. Only 56.5 % of the participants desired to get more knowledge, and 81.2 % were interested in attending ECG evaluation workshops.

Conclusion: Orthopaedic surgeons showed sufficient knowledge when determining the normality of ECG trace papers; however, they could not reach the proper diagnosis, and Junior surgeons performed slightly better than their senior peers. Most surgeons are willing to attend ECG evaluation and interpretation workshops to improve their knowledge level.

Keywords: Cardiovascular complications; Diagnosis; ECG; Electrocardiogram interpretation; Orthopaedic surgeons.