Abstract 149 Table 1
ReferenceStudy Type# Patients Studied# Patients with Abnormal EKG# Patients identified at high risk for SCDNumber with normal H&P but abnormal EKGTests used to identify the patients at risk?# False positive EKGs
Drezner, 2015Retrospective79022 (2.8%)5 (0.6%)4 (80%)EKG17 (2.2%)
Mayer, 2012Prospective69271 (10.3%)25 (3.6%)32 (4%) had either abnormal history or physical examEKG and echoNot mentioned
Anderson, 2014Prospective65979 (12.0%)5 (0.8%)Of 79 with abnormal EKG, 11 (14%) had abnormal H&PPhysical, ECG, then ECHO was doneNot mentioned
Fuller, 1997Prospective5,615146 (2.6%)Not mentionedHistory was negative in all and Physical detected 1/5615History, physical and EKG130 (2.3%)
Price, 2014Prospective2,01762 (3.1%)5 (0.2%)History and physical detected 2 of the abnormalities at risk for SCDHistory, physical, ECG, then ECHO2 (0.2%)
Le, 2010Retrospective658222 (33.7% )8 (1.2%)Not mentionedHistory, physical, then EKGNot mentioned
Riding NR, 2015Prospective2,491132 (5.5%)10 (0.4%)Not mentionedUsed \“Refined Criteria\”* Cardiovascular screening, ECG, then ECHOspecificity 94%
  • *Refined criteria is a combination of Seattle Criteria and European Society criteria. Only those who fulfilled the Refined Criteria, would get further testing, such as stress test or echo.