Why are we still interpreting cardiac rhythms?

Combatdoc said:
My first thought when I read this is, there is no such thing as AI, just machine learning. I have a masters in IT (Dont ask, job just sucks) and deep learning is just use of a wider group of sampling for the algorithm. For a machine to interpret a rhythm is like asking who John Smith is... too many possibilities and without human talent (read arts) it won't be possible to accurately use for a long time. Think Tesla and "it'll be ready in ten years" every ten years.
Sorry for the rant, just not a fan of the term AI.
Click to expand...
And machine learning is only as good as the people programming it. GI/GO
 
My favorite is that one road we all have in our areas that have nice rhythmic bumps, literally every time we are on said road the monitor reads vtach and freaks out alarms blaring. That is white philips monitors and we recently switched to zoll x/r series and same thing happens still.
 
NPO said:
Nor do we have the ability to check it in the field (usually).
Click to expand...
I would love to have istat machines an ambulances, would be amazing for sepsis testing lactic acid, trop on mi’s/chest pain, dialysis patients, ect we have long transport times to even the closest let alone specialty facilities, 30 mins is short for us, 2+hrs is long, so we could def run a few istat tests but those are extremely expensive.
 
MMiz said:
Whenever I see a cardiac strip posted online, in this community or elsewhere, I note how different the interpretations are by so many qualified people.

With AI, deep learning models, and so much technology, why aren't we better leveraging technology to assess cardiac rhythms? Why in 2021 are paramedics still interpreting cardiac rhythms?
Click to expand...
As medics, we all know about "perishable skills". EKG interpretation is a perishable skill. As per other replies, AI, etc. provide ERRONEOUS interpretations all too often. I had a pt in the ED with peaked T waves, no ST elevation, and it was interpreted as a STEMI. One other pt had an interpretation of LAD (correct), but didn't say LBBB (which was present). Our interpretations fail to recognize LVH routinely. I am not a fan of technology when it comes to my patients. If we rely on technology, we are "treating the numbers", not the pt. If we were to go the route of technology, let's hire The Geek Squad.
 
wtferick said:
My main concern is why do Paramedics transport elevated trop levels to non cardiac receiving hospitals? Lol
Click to expand...
Is there such a thing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top