PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of jroyalcgpracBJGP at RCGPBJGP at PubMed CentralJ R Coll Gen Pract at PubMed CentralRCGP homepage
 
J R Coll Gen Pract. 1975 June; 25(155): 451–453.
PMCID: PMC2157579

The place of the electrocardiograph in the study of cardiovascular problems in the elderly

Abstract

In a group of 64 patients (29 men and 35 women) all aged 65 or over referred for electrocardiography in this Department, there were 30 (16 men and 14 women) with no recorded clinical evidence of major cardiovascular disorders, past or present. Of these `clinically negative' patients 19 (ten men and nine women) showed codable abnormalities when their electrocardiograms were read and classified according to the Minnesota code.

In a group of 121 patients (63 men and 58 women) aged 42-64 only seven (six men and one woman of 58) `clinically negative' patients showed codable abnormalities in their electrocardigrams. It is suggested that the high yield of codable abnormalities in the former group reflects incomplete and misleading cardiovascular histories or atypical clinical presentations in that group and a plea is made for a more widespread use of routine electrocardiography when trying to sort out the often multiple and confusing clinical problems of the elderly.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (359K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Michie I. Electrocardiographic changes in the elderly. Gerontol Clin (Basel) 1970;12(4):193–202. [PubMed]
  • Pathy MS. Clinical presentation of myocardial infarction in the elderly. Br Heart J. 1967 Mar;29(2):190–199. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Reid DD, Holland WW, Humerfelt S, Rose G. A cardiovascular survey of British postal workers. Lancet. 1966 Mar 19;1(7438):614–618. [PubMed]

Articles from The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners are provided here courtesy of Royal College of General Practitioners