Academic Journal
Webtool to enhance the accuracy of diagnostic algorithms for HFpEF:a prospective cross-over study
| العنوان: | Webtool to enhance the accuracy of diagnostic algorithms for HFpEF:a prospective cross-over study |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Weerts, Jerremy, Amin, Hesam, Barandiarán Aizpurua, Arantxa, Gevaert, Andreas B., Handoko, M. Louis, Dauw, Jeroen, Tun, Han Naung, Rommel, Karl-Philipp, Verbrugge, Frederik H., Kresoja, Karl-Patrik, Sanders-van Wijk, Sandra, Brunner-la Rocca, Hans-Peter, Bayés-Genís, Antoni, Lumens, Joost, Knackstedt, Christian, van Empel, Vanessa P. M. |
| المصدر: | Weerts , J , Amin , H , Barandiarán Aizpurua , A , Gevaert , A B , Handoko , M L , Dauw , J , Tun , H N , Rommel , K-P , Verbrugge , F H , Kresoja , K-P , Sanders-van Wijk , S , Brunner-la Rocca , H-P , Bayés-Genís , A , Lumens , J , Knackstedt , C & van Empel , V P M 2023 , ' Webtool to enhance the accuracy of diagnostic algorithms for HFpEF : a prospective cross-over study ' , ESC Heart Failure , vol. 10 .... |
| سنة النشر: | 2023 |
| الوصف: | Aims: Diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) can be challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the potential of a webtool to enhance the scoring accuracy when applying the complex HFA-PEFF and H 2 FPEF algorithms, which are commonly used for diagnosing HFpEF. Methods and results: We developed an online tool, the HFpEF calculator, that enables the automatic calculation of current HFpEF algorithms. We assessed the accuracy of manual vs. automatic scoring, defined as the percentage of correct scores, in a cohort of cardiologists with varying clinical experience. Cardiologists scored eight online clinical cases using a triple cross-over design (i.e. two manual–two automatic–two manual–two automatic). Data were analysed in study completers (n = 55, 29% heart failure specialists, 42% general cardiologists, and 29% cardiology residents). Manually calculated scores were correct in 50% (HFA-PEFF: 50% [50–75]; H 2 FPEF: 50% [38–50]). Correct scoring improved to 100% using the HFpEF calculator (HFA-PEFF: 100% [88–100], P < 0.001; H 2 FPEF: 100% [75–100], P < 0.001). Time spent on clinical cases was similar between scoring methods (±4 min). When corrections for faulty algorithm scores were displayed, cardiologists changed their diagnostic decision in up to 67% of cases. At least 67% of cardiologists preferred using the online tool for future cases in clinical practice. Conclusions: Manual calculation of HFpEF diagnostic algorithms is often inaccurate. Using an automated webtool to calculate HFpEF algorithms significantly improved correct scoring. This new approach may impact the eventual diagnostic decision in up to two-thirds of cases, supporting its routine use in clinical practice. |
| نوع الوثيقة: | article in journal/newspaper |
| اللغة: | English |
| DOI: | 10.1002/ehf2.14525 |
| الاتاحة: | https://research.vumc.nl/en/publications/e288fd15-b5a9-4273-88e9-344872314af1 https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.14525 http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171332660&partnerID=8YFLogxK |
| Rights: | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsbas.3407128A |
| قاعدة البيانات: | BASE |
| DOI: | 10.1002/ehf2.14525 |
|---|