Literature DB >> 19673712

Emergency physician high pretest probability for acute coronary syndrome correlates with adverse cardiovascular outcomes.

Abhinav Chandra1, Christopher J Lindsell, Alexander Limkakeng, Deborah B Diercks, James W Hoekstra, Judd E Hollander, J Douglas Kirk, W Frank Peacock, W Brian Gibler, Charles V Pollack.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The value of unstructured physician estimate of risk for disease processes, other than acute coronary syndrome (ACS), has been demonstrated. The authors sought to evaluate the predictive value of unstructured physician estimate of risk for ACS in emergency department (ED) patients without obvious initial evidence of a cardiac event.
METHODS: This was a post hoc secondary analysis of the Internet Tracking Registry for Acute Coronary Syndromes (i*trACS), a prospectively collected multicenter data registry of patients over the age of 18 years presenting to the ED with symptoms of ACS between 1999 and 2001. In this registry, following patient history, physical exam, and electrocardiogram (ECG), the unstructured treating physician estimate of risk was recorded. A 30-day follow-up and a medical record review were used to determine rates of adverse cardiac events, death, myocardial infarction (MI), or revascularization procedure. The analysis included all patients with nondiagnostic ECG changes, normal initial biomarkers, and a non-MI initial impression from the registry and excluded those without complete data or who were lost to follow-up. Data were stratified by unstructured physician risk estimate: noncardiac, low risk, high risk, or unstable angina.
RESULTS: Of 15,608 unique patients in the registry, 10,145 met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Patients were defined as having unstable angina in 6.0% of cases; high risk, 23.5% of cases; low risk, 44.2%; and noncardiac, 26.3% of cases. Adverse cardiac event rates had an inverse relationship, decreasing from 22.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18.8% to 25.6%) for unstable angina, 10.2% (95% CI = 9.0% to 11.5%) for those stratified as high risk, 2.2% (95% CI = 1.8% to 2.6%) for low risk, and to 1.8% (95% CI = 1.4% to 2.4%) for noncardiac. The relative risk (RR) of an adverse cardiac event for those with an initial label of unstable angina compared to those with a low-risk designation was 10.2 (95% CI = 8.0 to 13.0). The RR of an event for those with a high-risk initial impression compared to those with a low-risk initial impression was 4.7 (95% CI = 3.8 to 5.9). The risk of an event among those with a low-risk initial impression was the same as for those with a noncardiac initial impression (RR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.6 to 1.2).
CONCLUSIONS: In ED patients without obvious initial evidence of a cardiac event, unstructured emergency physician (EP) estimate of risk correlates with adverse cardiac outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19673712     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00470.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  8 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic algorithms for acute coronary syndrome-is one better than another?

Authors:  Gianfranco Cervellin; Camilla Mattiuzzi; Chiara Bovo; Giuseppe Lippi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-05

Review 2.  When should patient intuition be taken seriously?

Authors:  Stephen A Buetow; Bridget Mintoft
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Incremental value of objective cardiac testing in addition to physician impression and serial contemporary troponin measurements in women.

Authors:  Deborah B Diercks; Bryn E Mumma; W Frank Peacock; Judd E Hollander; Basmah Safdar; Simon A Mahler; Chadwick D Miller; Francis L Counselman; Robert Birkhahn; Jon Schrock; Adam J Singer; John T Nagurney
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 3.451

4.  High-sensitivity versus conventional troponin in the emergency department for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Yonathan Freund; Camille Chenevier-Gobeaux; Pascale Bonnet; Yann-Erick Claessens; Jean-Christophe Allo; Benoit Doumenc; François Leumani; Claudine Cosson; Bruno Riou; Patrick Ray
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 9.097

5.  Discrepancy between clinician and research assistant in TIMI score calculation (TRIAGED CPU).

Authors:  Brian T Taylor; Michelino Mancini
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2014-11-11

6.  Diagnostic values of chest pain history, ECG, troponin and clinical gestalt in patients with chest pain and potential acute coronary syndrome assessed in the emergency department.

Authors:  Arash Mokhtari; Eric Dryver; Martin Söderholm; Ulf Ekelund
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-05-07

7.  Provocative biomarker stress test: stress-delta N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide.

Authors:  Alexander T Limkakeng; J Clancy Leahy; S Michelle Griffin; Yuliya Lokhnygina; Elias Jaffa; Robert H Christenson; L Kristin Newby
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2018-10-08

8.  Comparison of usual care and the HEART score for effectively and safely discharging patients with low-risk chest pain in the emergency department: would the score always help?

Authors:  Guangmei Wang; Wen Zheng; Shuo Wu; Jingjing Ma; He Zhang; Jiaqi Zheng; Jiali Wang; Feng Xu; Yuguo Chen
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 2.882

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.