Salena M Preciado1, Adam L Sharp1, Benjamin C Sun2, Aileen Baecker1, Yi-Lin Wu1, Ming-Sum Lee3, Ernest Shen1, Maros Ferencik4, Shaw Natsui5, Aniket A Kawatkar1, Stacy J Park1, Rita F Redberg6. 1. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Leonard Davis Institute, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Division of Cardiology, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. 4. Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. 5. New York City Health + Hospitals, New York, NY. 6. Division of Cardiology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. Electronic address: rita.redberg@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare clinical management and outcomes of emergency department (ED) encounters by sex after implementation of a clinical care pathway in 15 community EDs that standardized recommendations based on patient risk, using the History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) score. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of adult ED encounters evaluated for suspected acute coronary syndrome with a documented HEART score from May 20, 2016, to December 1, 2017. The primary outcomes were hospitalization or 30-day stress testing. Secondary outcomes included 30-day acute myocardial infarction or all-cause death (major adverse cardiac event). A generalized estimating equation regression model was used to compare the odds of hospitalization or stress testing by sex; we report HEART scores (0 to 10) stratified by sex and describing major adverse cardiac events. RESULTS: A total of 34,715 adult ED encounters met the inclusion criteria (56.0% women). A higher proportion of women were classified as low risk (60.5% versus 52.4%; odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33 to 1.45). Women were hospitalized or received stress testing less frequently than men for low HEART scores (18.8% versus 22.8%; OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.84) and intermediate ones (46.7% versus 49.7%; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.83 to 0.95), but similarly for high-risk ones (74.1% versus 74.4%; OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.28). Women had 18% lower odds of hospitalization or noninvasive cardiac testing (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.86), even after adjusting for HEART score and comorbidities. Men had higher risks of major adverse cardiac events than women for all HEART score categories but the risk for men was significantly higher among low-risk HEART scores (0.4% versus 0.1%). CONCLUSION: Women with low-risk HEART scores are hospitalized or stress tested less than men, which is likely appropriate, and women have better outcomes than men. Use of the HEART score has the potential to reduce sex disparities in acute coronary syndrome care.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare clinical management and outcomes of emergency department (ED) encounters by sex after implementation of a clinical care pathway in 15 community EDs that standardized recommendations based on patient risk, using the History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) score. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of adult ED encounters evaluated for suspected acute coronary syndrome with a documented HEART score from May 20, 2016, to December 1, 2017. The primary outcomes were hospitalization or 30-day stress testing. Secondary outcomes included 30-day acute myocardial infarction or all-cause death (major adverse cardiac event). A generalized estimating equation regression model was used to compare the odds of hospitalization or stress testing by sex; we report HEART scores (0 to 10) stratified by sex and describing major adverse cardiac events. RESULTS: A total of 34,715 adult ED encounters met the inclusion criteria (56.0% women). A higher proportion of women were classified as low risk (60.5% versus 52.4%; odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33 to 1.45). Women were hospitalized or received stress testing less frequently than men for low HEART scores (18.8% versus 22.8%; OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.84) and intermediate ones (46.7% versus 49.7%; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.83 to 0.95), but similarly for high-risk ones (74.1% versus 74.4%; OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.28). Women had 18% lower odds of hospitalization or noninvasive cardiac testing (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.86), even after adjusting for HEART score and comorbidities. Men had higher risks of major adverse cardiac events than women for all HEART score categories but the risk for men was significantly higher among low-risk HEART scores (0.4% versus 0.1%). CONCLUSION: Women with low-risk HEART scores are hospitalized or stress tested less than men, which is likely appropriate, and women have better outcomes than men. Use of the HEART score has the potential to reduce sex disparities in acute coronary syndrome care.
Authors: B E Stähli; C Gebhard; K Yonekawa; C E Gebhard; L A Altwegg; A von Eckardstein; M Hersberger; I Novopashenny; R Wolters; M B Wischnewsky; T F Lüscher; W Maier Journal: Cardiology Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 1.869
Authors: Adam L Sharp; Aileen S Baecker; Ernest Shen; Rita Redberg; Ming-Sum Lee; Maros Ferencik; Shaw Natsui; Chengyi Zheng; Aniket Kawatkar; Michael K Gould; Benjamin C Sun Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2019-02-21 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Erik P Hess; Jeffery J Perry; Lisa A Calder; Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy; Veronique L Roger; George A Wells; Ian G Stiell Journal: CJEM Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.410
Authors: Anne G Rosenfeld; Elizabeth P Knight; Alana Steffen; Larisa Burke; Mohamud Daya; Holli A DeVon Journal: Heart Lung Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 2.210
Authors: Michael B Weinstock; Scott Weingart; Frank Orth; Douglas VanFossen; Colin Kaide; Judy Anderson; David H Newman Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Stephen D Wiviott; Christopher P Cannon; David A Morrow; Sabina A Murphy; C Michael Gibson; Carolyn H McCabe; Marc S Sabatine; Nader Rifai; Robert P Giugliano; Peter M DiBattiste; Laura A Demopoulos; Elliott M Antman; Eugene Braunwald Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-02-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: K H Humphries; M Izadnegahdar; T Sedlak; J Saw; N Johnston; K Schenck-Gustafsson; R U Shah; V Regitz-Zagrosek; J Grewal; V Vaccarino; J Wei; C N Bairey Merz Journal: Front Neuroendocrinol Date: 2017-04-18 Impact factor: 8.333
Authors: Ege G Onal; Kit Knier; Alexander W Hunt; John M Knudsen; David M Nestler; Ronna L Campbell; Kristine M Thompson; Kharmene L Sunga; Laura E Walker; Bo E Madsen; Annie T Sadosty; Alyson J McGregor; Aidan F Mullan; Molly M Jeffery; Venkatesh R Bellamkonda Journal: J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Date: 2022-09-26