PP23 Accuracy of emergency medical services (EMS) telephone triage in identifying acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for chest pain patients. A systematic review abstract

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. A10.2-A10
Author(s):  
Ahmed Alotaibi ◽  
Abdulrhman Alghamdi ◽  
Charles Reynard ◽  
Richard Body

IntroductionChest pain is one of the most common reasons for ambulance callouts and presentation to Emergency Departments (EDs). Differentiating patients with serious conditions (e.g. acute coronary syndrome [ACS]) from the majority, who have self-limiting, non-cardiac conditions is extremely challenging. This causes over-triage and over-use of healthcare resources. We aimed to systematically review existing evidence on the accuracy of emergency telephone triage to detect ACS or life-threatening conditions associated with chest pain.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Two independent investigators searched the Embase, Medline, and Cinahl databases for relevant papers. We included retrospective and prospective cohort studies written in English and investigating EMS telephone triage for chest pain patients linked with final diagnosis of ACS. Studies were summarised in a narrative format as the data were not suitable for meta-analysis.ResultIn total, 553 studies were identified from the literature search and cross-referencing. After excluding 550 studies, three were eligible for inclusion. Among those 3 studies, there are different prediction models developed by authors with variation in variables to detect ACS. The result showed that dispatch triage tools have good sensitivity to detect ACS and life-threatening conditions although they are used to triage sign and symptoms rather than diagnosing the patients. On the other hand, prediction models were built to detect ACS and life-threatening conditions and therefore it showed better sensitivity and NPV.ConclusionEMS dispatch systems accuracy for ACS and life-threatening conditions associated with chest pain is good. Since the dispatch tools were built to triage ambulance response priority based on sign and symptoms, this led to over triage among non-life-threatening chest pain patients. Over triage were slightly reduced by deriving prediction models and showed better sensitivity.

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e045815
Author(s):  
Ahmed Alotaibi ◽  
Abdulrhman Alghamdi ◽  
Charles Reynard ◽  
Richard Body

ObjectiveTo systematically appraise the available evidence to determine the accuracy of decision aids for emergency medical services (EMS) telephone triage of patients with chest pain suspected to be caused by acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or life-threatening conditions.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesElectronic searches were performed in Embase 1974, Medline 1946 and CINAHL 1937 databases from 3 March 2020 to 4 March 2020.Eligibility criteriaThe review included all types of original studies that included adult patients (>18 years) who called EMS with a primary complaint of chest pain and evaluated dispatch triage priority by telephone. Outcomes of interest were a final diagnosis of ACS, acute myocardial infarction or other life-threatening conditions.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors independently extracted data on study design, population, study period, outcome and all data for assessment of accuracy, including cross-tabulation of triage priority against the outcomes of interest. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 assessment tool.ResultsSearches identified 553 papers, of which 3 were eligible for inclusion. Those reports described the evaluation of three different prediction models with variation in the variables used to detect ACS. The overall results showed that dispatch triage tools have good sensitivity to detect ACS and life-threatening conditions, even though they are used to triage signs and symptoms rather than diagnosing the patients. On the other hand, prediction models were built to detect ACS and life-threatening conditions, and therefore, prediction models showed better sensitivity and negative predictive value than dispatch triage tools.ConclusionWe have identified three prediction models for telephone triage of patients with chest pain. While they have been found to have greater accuracy than standard EMS dispatch systems, prospective external validation is essential before clinical use is considered.PROSPERO registration numberThis systematic review was pre-registered on the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) database (reference CRD42020171184).


Cardiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Ronny Alcalai ◽  
Boris Varshisky ◽  
Ahmad Marhig ◽  
David Leibowitz ◽  
Larissa Kogan-Boguslavsky ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Early and accurate diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is essential for initiating lifesaving interventions. In this article, the diagnostic performance of a novel point-of-care rapid assay (SensAheart<sup>©</sup>) is analyzed. This assay qualitatively determines the presence of 2 cardiac biomarkers troponin I and heart-type fatty acid-binding protein that are present soon after onset of myocardial injury. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We conducted a prospective observational study of consecutive patients who presented to the emergency department with typical chest pain. Simultaneous high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) and SensAheart testing was performed upon hospital admission. Diagnostic accuracy was computed using SensAheart or hs-cTnT levels versus the final diagnosis defined as positive/negative. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 225 patients analyzed, a final diagnosis of ACS was established in 138 patients, 87 individuals diagnosed with nonischemic chest pain. In the overall population, as compared to hs-cTnT, the sensitivity of the initial SensAheart assay was significantly higher (80.4 vs. 63.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.002) whereas specificity was lower (78.6 vs. 95.4%, <i>p</i> = 0.036). The overall diagnostic accuracy of SensAheart assay was similar to the hs-cTnT (82.7% compared to 76.0%, <i>p</i> = 0.08). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Upon first medical contact, the novel point-of-care rapid SensAheart assay shows a diagnostic performance similar to hs-cTnT. The combination of 2 cardiac biomarkers in the same kit allows for very early detection of myocardial damage. The SensAheart assay is a reliable and practical tool for ruling-in the diagnosis of ACS.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aan Nur'aeni ◽  
Yanny Trisyani ◽  
Donny Nurhamsyah ◽  
Oman Hendi ◽  
Rahmalia Amni ◽  
...  

The main clinical manifestations of patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) during the acute period is chest pain. Handling complaints of pain patients with ACS definitively done with medication; however, it is possible to do additional nonpharmacological therapies to optimize the results. Nonpharmacological treatment can be performed in various ways, one of them with heat therapy. This literature review aimed to determine the use of heat therapy as an additional nonpharmacological intervention in reducing the intensity of chest pain in patients with ACS. Four electronic databases were used to carry out systematic searches on articles, namely Proquest, Science Direct, Pubmed, and CINAHL-Ebsco. The combination of keywords was "heat therapy" AND "chest pain" AND "acute coronary syndrome" NOT "Literature review" OR "Literature review" OR "Overview" OR "Systematic Review" OR "Meta-analysis." The inclusion criteria used were experimental study articles, peer-reviewed articles, and research articles written in English and performed in the period between 2014-2019. The search results obtained three articles that met the inclusion criteria and analyzed. The results of the study found that heat therapy effective in reducing the intensity of chest pain, the use of analgesic opioids, and improving the patient's hemodynamics. In conclusion, the therapy can be considered used as adjunctive therapy to reduce chest pain in patients with ACS with certain criteria. In addition, further research is also needed to see the effectiveness of this therapy if it is implemented with more frequent frequencies and compare its effectiveness in reducing chest pain if the application is given to the anterior or posterior of the chest.


2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 1111-1119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Moumneh ◽  
Vanessa Richard-Jourjon ◽  
Emilie Friou ◽  
Fabrice Prunier ◽  
Caroline Soulie-Chavignon ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ahmad Hazem ◽  
Sunita Sharma ◽  
Amit Sharma ◽  
Cameron Leitch ◽  
Roopalakshmi Sharadanant ◽  
...  

Importance: Up to 10% of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have right bundle branch block (RBBB), and RBBB has been associated with a higher risk of mortality. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prognostic significance of RBBB for patients with AMI. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) Data Sources: We have systematically searched Ovid, Scopus and Web of Science through January 2014. Study Selection: Reviewers working independently and in duplicate screened all eligible abstracts, selecting studies that described all-cause mortality or cardiovascular death in patients with RBBB and suspected ACS. We excluded studies that reported unadjusted outcomes. Knowledge synthesis: We pooled risk ratio with hazard ratio in studies reporting those outcomes. When reported, odds ratio was converted into risk ratio using reported event rate in each study’s unexposed -read: non RBBB- group. Main Outcomes: All-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality (death). Results: Eighteen studies were found that reported eligible data. All were observational studies, involving over 89,000 patients. In short-term follow up (up to 30 days), RBBB on presentation was associated with higher all-cause mortality rate, compared to patients without RBBB (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.76-2.82). There was a trend for higher mortality at long-term follow up (range: 6 months-16 years) that did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.93-2.25). Figure-1 demonstrates the forest plot. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and majority of included studied were deemed moderate to high quality. Conclusion and Relevance: RBBB is associated with a more than 2-fold higher risk of all-cause mortality in patients with AMI at 30 days follow up. Patients with AMI and RBBB represent a high risk group for adverse outcomes. A sentence on the differential findings for new vs. old RBBB and association with outcomes could follow here.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document