Publication:
Stress echocardiography with smartphone: real-time remote reading for regional wall motion

dc.contributor.authorScali, Maria Chiara (55929478400)
dc.contributor.authorde Azevedo Bellagamba, Clarissa Carmona (57194341124)
dc.contributor.authorCiampi, Quirino (6602299243)
dc.contributor.authorSimova, Iana (23391267500)
dc.contributor.authorde Castro e Silva Pretto, José Luis (6508318426)
dc.contributor.authorDjordjevic-Dikic, Ana (57003143600)
dc.contributor.authorDodi, Claudio (6602478787)
dc.contributor.authorCortigiani, Lauro (55663049600)
dc.contributor.authorZagatina, Angela (22939399700)
dc.contributor.authorTrambaiolo, Paolo (6602701604)
dc.contributor.authorTorres, Marco R. (7402581476)
dc.contributor.authorCitro, Rodolfo (15921921800)
dc.contributor.authorColonna, Paolo (57221823607)
dc.contributor.authorPaterni, Marco (7003660393)
dc.contributor.authorPicano, Eugenio (7102408994)
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-12T17:04:13Z
dc.date.available2025-06-12T17:04:13Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractThe diffusion of smart-phones offers access to the best remote expertise in stress echo (SE). To evaluate the reliability of SE based on smart-phone filming and reading. A set of 20 SE video-clips were read in random sequence with a multiple choice six-answer test by ten readers from five different countries (Italy, Brazil, Serbia, Bulgaria, Russia) of the “SE2020” study network. The gold standard to assess accuracy was a core-lab expert reader in agreement with angiographic verification (0 = wrong, 1 = right). The same set of 20 SE studies were read, in random order and >2 months apart, on desktop Workstation and via smartphones by ten remote readers. Image quality was graded from 1 = poor but readable, to 3 = excellent. Kappa (k) statistics was used to assess intra- and inter-observer agreement. The image quality was comparable in desktop workstation vs. smartphone (2.0 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 0.7, p = NS). The average reading time per case was similar for desktop versus smartphone (90 ± 39 vs. 82 ± 54 s, p = NS). The overall diagnostic accuracy of the ten readers was similar for desktop workstation vs. smartphone (84 vs. 91%, p = NS). Intra-observer agreement (desktop vs. smartphone) was good (k = 0.81 ± 0.14). Inter-observer agreement was good and similar via desktop or smartphone (k = 0.69 vs. k = 0.72, p = NS). The diagnostic accuracy and consistency of SE reading among certified readers was high and similar via desktop workstation or via smartphone. © 2017, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-017-1167-2
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85019655870&doi=10.1007%2fs10554-017-1167-2&partnerID=40&md5=051bfb17c3fe0820cc11f16ef2a5fc7d
dc.identifier.urihttps://remedy.med.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/6790
dc.subjectEchocardiography
dc.subjectStress echocardiography
dc.subjectWall motion
dc.titleStress echocardiography with smartphone: real-time remote reading for regional wall motion
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files