TABLE 1.

Bland-Altman analysis and correlation for volumes and ejection fraction (EF) for biplane area-length (AL) method versus Simpson’s method for three different users

		Expert user	Regular user	Novice user
EDV	Mean ± SD (mL)	146±37***	162±45	160±40
	Bias ± SD (mL)	7±13	23±18	21±14
	r (versus Simpson’s)	0.95	0.92	0.94
ESV	Mean ± SD (mL)	62±30***	73±34	73±31
	Bias ± SD (mL)	4±8	15±11	16±11
	r (versus Simpson’s)	0.97	0.96	0.94
SV	Mean ± SD (mL)	84±20*	90±23	87±25
	Bias ± SD (mL)	2±13	8±15	5±15
	r (versus Simpson’s)	0.82	0.79	0.81
EF	Mean ± SD (%)	59±12***	57±11	55±12
	Bias ± SD (%)	–1±5	–4±5	–5±7
	r (versus Simpson’s)	0.89	0.90	0.91

The biplane AL method was performed by three different users and Simpson’s method was performed by one user.

*P<0.01 experienced user versus regular user;

**P<0.01 experienced user versus novice user. EDV End-diastolic volume; ESV End-systolic volume; r Pearson’s correlation coefficient; SV Stroke volume