Agreement and coding reliability of the Minnesota and Mayo electrocardiographic coding systems

Thomas E. Kottke, Hiroyuki Daida, Kent R Bailey, Stephen C. Hammill, Richard S. Crow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Problem: To determine whether diagnoses of myocardial infarction assigned by a system that uses Marquette 12SL electrocardiographic (ECG) codes with manual over-reading agree with diagnoses assigned by Minnesota ECG codes. Studies undertaken: Agreement and recode reliability of Minnesota and Mayo coding systems based on 768 ECGs plus chest pain history and serum enzyme values were analyzed for a stratified random sample of 141 patients with an event in 1990 or 1991 coded as HICDA 410.x, 411, 413 or 796.9. The population was reconstructed from the stratified random sample so that population-based inferences could be made from the analysis. Results: For the stratified random sample, exact agreement on 4 categories (evolving diagnostic, diagnostic, equivocal, or other ECG) between Mayo and Minnesota ECG coding was 53.9% (kappa = 0.37 ± 0.05). Code-recode agreement was higher for Minnesota coding (83.0%; kappa = 0.74 ± 0.05) compared with Mayo coding (73.8%; kappa = 0.64 ± 0.05). The same pattern was present for the reconstructed population. For coding myocardial infarction based on the ECG, serum enzyme levels, and the presence or absence of ischemic chest pain, agreement between Mayo and Minnesota coding was 84.4% (kappa = 0.72 ± 0.05) based on the stratified random sample and 81.7% (kappa = 0.67 ± 0.06) based on the reconstructed population. For the stratified random sample, reliability of diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 93.6% (kappa = 0.88 ± 0.04) for the Minnesota system and 94.3% (kappa = 0.90 ± 0.03) for the Mayo system. Conclusion: ECG interpretation by the Mayo and Minnesota coding systems differs significantly, and Mayo ECG coding is less reliable than Minnesota ECG coding. Coding of myocardial infarction on the basis of ECGs, serum enzymes, and ischemic chest pain, however, is equally reliable for both systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)303-312
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Electrocardiology
Volume31
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1998

Fingerprint

Chest Pain
Myocardial Infarction
Population
Electrocardiography
Enzymes
Serum
Reading

Keywords

  • Electrocardiograms
  • Epidemiology
  • Myocardial infarction
  • Reliability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Agreement and coding reliability of the Minnesota and Mayo electrocardiographic coding systems. / Kottke, Thomas E.; Daida, Hiroyuki; Bailey, Kent R; Hammill, Stephen C.; Crow, Richard S.

In: Journal of Electrocardiology, Vol. 31, No. 4, 10.1998, p. 303-312.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kottke, Thomas E. ; Daida, Hiroyuki ; Bailey, Kent R ; Hammill, Stephen C. ; Crow, Richard S. / Agreement and coding reliability of the Minnesota and Mayo electrocardiographic coding systems. In: Journal of Electrocardiology. 1998 ; Vol. 31, No. 4. pp. 303-312.
@article{fd30df99933f47ddb93d2dfa60350f97,
title = "Agreement and coding reliability of the Minnesota and Mayo electrocardiographic coding systems",
abstract = "Problem: To determine whether diagnoses of myocardial infarction assigned by a system that uses Marquette 12SL electrocardiographic (ECG) codes with manual over-reading agree with diagnoses assigned by Minnesota ECG codes. Studies undertaken: Agreement and recode reliability of Minnesota and Mayo coding systems based on 768 ECGs plus chest pain history and serum enzyme values were analyzed for a stratified random sample of 141 patients with an event in 1990 or 1991 coded as HICDA 410.x, 411, 413 or 796.9. The population was reconstructed from the stratified random sample so that population-based inferences could be made from the analysis. Results: For the stratified random sample, exact agreement on 4 categories (evolving diagnostic, diagnostic, equivocal, or other ECG) between Mayo and Minnesota ECG coding was 53.9{\%} (kappa = 0.37 ± 0.05). Code-recode agreement was higher for Minnesota coding (83.0{\%}; kappa = 0.74 ± 0.05) compared with Mayo coding (73.8{\%}; kappa = 0.64 ± 0.05). The same pattern was present for the reconstructed population. For coding myocardial infarction based on the ECG, serum enzyme levels, and the presence or absence of ischemic chest pain, agreement between Mayo and Minnesota coding was 84.4{\%} (kappa = 0.72 ± 0.05) based on the stratified random sample and 81.7{\%} (kappa = 0.67 ± 0.06) based on the reconstructed population. For the stratified random sample, reliability of diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 93.6{\%} (kappa = 0.88 ± 0.04) for the Minnesota system and 94.3{\%} (kappa = 0.90 ± 0.03) for the Mayo system. Conclusion: ECG interpretation by the Mayo and Minnesota coding systems differs significantly, and Mayo ECG coding is less reliable than Minnesota ECG coding. Coding of myocardial infarction on the basis of ECGs, serum enzymes, and ischemic chest pain, however, is equally reliable for both systems.",
keywords = "Electrocardiograms, Epidemiology, Myocardial infarction, Reliability",
author = "Kottke, {Thomas E.} and Hiroyuki Daida and Bailey, {Kent R} and Hammill, {Stephen C.} and Crow, {Richard S.}",
year = "1998",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1016/S0022-0736(98)90015-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "303--312",
journal = "Journal of Electrocardiology",
issn = "0022-0736",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Agreement and coding reliability of the Minnesota and Mayo electrocardiographic coding systems

AU - Kottke, Thomas E.

AU - Daida, Hiroyuki

AU - Bailey, Kent R

AU - Hammill, Stephen C.

AU - Crow, Richard S.

PY - 1998/10

Y1 - 1998/10

N2 - Problem: To determine whether diagnoses of myocardial infarction assigned by a system that uses Marquette 12SL electrocardiographic (ECG) codes with manual over-reading agree with diagnoses assigned by Minnesota ECG codes. Studies undertaken: Agreement and recode reliability of Minnesota and Mayo coding systems based on 768 ECGs plus chest pain history and serum enzyme values were analyzed for a stratified random sample of 141 patients with an event in 1990 or 1991 coded as HICDA 410.x, 411, 413 or 796.9. The population was reconstructed from the stratified random sample so that population-based inferences could be made from the analysis. Results: For the stratified random sample, exact agreement on 4 categories (evolving diagnostic, diagnostic, equivocal, or other ECG) between Mayo and Minnesota ECG coding was 53.9% (kappa = 0.37 ± 0.05). Code-recode agreement was higher for Minnesota coding (83.0%; kappa = 0.74 ± 0.05) compared with Mayo coding (73.8%; kappa = 0.64 ± 0.05). The same pattern was present for the reconstructed population. For coding myocardial infarction based on the ECG, serum enzyme levels, and the presence or absence of ischemic chest pain, agreement between Mayo and Minnesota coding was 84.4% (kappa = 0.72 ± 0.05) based on the stratified random sample and 81.7% (kappa = 0.67 ± 0.06) based on the reconstructed population. For the stratified random sample, reliability of diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 93.6% (kappa = 0.88 ± 0.04) for the Minnesota system and 94.3% (kappa = 0.90 ± 0.03) for the Mayo system. Conclusion: ECG interpretation by the Mayo and Minnesota coding systems differs significantly, and Mayo ECG coding is less reliable than Minnesota ECG coding. Coding of myocardial infarction on the basis of ECGs, serum enzymes, and ischemic chest pain, however, is equally reliable for both systems.

AB - Problem: To determine whether diagnoses of myocardial infarction assigned by a system that uses Marquette 12SL electrocardiographic (ECG) codes with manual over-reading agree with diagnoses assigned by Minnesota ECG codes. Studies undertaken: Agreement and recode reliability of Minnesota and Mayo coding systems based on 768 ECGs plus chest pain history and serum enzyme values were analyzed for a stratified random sample of 141 patients with an event in 1990 or 1991 coded as HICDA 410.x, 411, 413 or 796.9. The population was reconstructed from the stratified random sample so that population-based inferences could be made from the analysis. Results: For the stratified random sample, exact agreement on 4 categories (evolving diagnostic, diagnostic, equivocal, or other ECG) between Mayo and Minnesota ECG coding was 53.9% (kappa = 0.37 ± 0.05). Code-recode agreement was higher for Minnesota coding (83.0%; kappa = 0.74 ± 0.05) compared with Mayo coding (73.8%; kappa = 0.64 ± 0.05). The same pattern was present for the reconstructed population. For coding myocardial infarction based on the ECG, serum enzyme levels, and the presence or absence of ischemic chest pain, agreement between Mayo and Minnesota coding was 84.4% (kappa = 0.72 ± 0.05) based on the stratified random sample and 81.7% (kappa = 0.67 ± 0.06) based on the reconstructed population. For the stratified random sample, reliability of diagnosis of myocardial infarction was 93.6% (kappa = 0.88 ± 0.04) for the Minnesota system and 94.3% (kappa = 0.90 ± 0.03) for the Mayo system. Conclusion: ECG interpretation by the Mayo and Minnesota coding systems differs significantly, and Mayo ECG coding is less reliable than Minnesota ECG coding. Coding of myocardial infarction on the basis of ECGs, serum enzymes, and ischemic chest pain, however, is equally reliable for both systems.

KW - Electrocardiograms

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Myocardial infarction

KW - Reliability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031752920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031752920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0022-0736(98)90015-2

DO - 10.1016/S0022-0736(98)90015-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 9817213

AN - SCOPUS:0031752920

VL - 31

SP - 303

EP - 312

JO - Journal of Electrocardiology

JF - Journal of Electrocardiology

SN - 0022-0736

IS - 4

ER -