Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Emergency physician estimates of the probability of acute coronary syndrome in a cohort of patients enrolled in a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography

  • Chuen Peng Lee (a1), Udo Hoffmann (a2), Fabian Bamberg (a2), David F. Brown (a3), Yuchaio Chang (a4), Clifford Swap (a3), Blair A. Parry (a3) and John T. Nagurney (a3)...

Abstract

Introduction:

Little information exists regarding how accurately emergency physicians (EPs) predict the probability of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Our objective was to determine if EPs can accurately predict ACS in a prospectively identified cohort of emergency department (ED) patients who met enrolment criteria for a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) and were admitted for a “rule out ACS” protocol.

Methods:

A prospective observational pilot study in an academic medical centre was carried out. EPs caring for patients with chest pain provided whole-number estimates of the probability of ACS after clinical review. This substudy was part of the now published Rule Out Myocardial Infarction/Ischemia Using Computer Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT) study, a study of CCTA and admission of patients for a rule out ACS protocol after a nondiagnostic evaluation. Predictions were grouped into probability groups based on the validated Goldman criteria. ACS was determined by an adjudication committee using American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/European Society of Cardiology guidelines.

Results:

A total of 334 predictions were obtained for a study population with a mean age of 54 (SD 12) years, 63% of whom were male. There were 35 ACS events. EPs predicted ACS better than by chance, and increasingly higher estimates were associated with a higher incidence of ACS (p = 0.0004). The percentage of patients with ACS was 0%, 6%, 7%, and 17%, respectively, for very low, low, intermediate, and high probability groups. EPs' estimates had a sensitivity of 63% using a > 20% probability of ACS to define a positive test. Lowering this threshold to > 7% to define a test as positive increased the sensitivity of physician estimates to 89% but lowered specificity from 65% to 24%

Conclusions:

Our data suggest that for a selected ED cohort meeting eligibility criteria for a study of CCTA, EPs predict ACS better than by chance, with an increasing proportion of patients proving to have ACS with increasing probability estimates. Lowering the estimate threshold does not result in an overall sensitivity level that is sufficient to send patients home from the ED and is associated with a poor specificity.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Emergency physician estimates of the probability of acute coronary syndrome in a cohort of patients enrolled in a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Emergency physician estimates of the probability of acute coronary syndrome in a cohort of patients enrolled in a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Emergency physician estimates of the probability of acute coronary syndrome in a cohort of patients enrolled in a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Zero Emerson Place, Suite 3b, Boston, MA 02114; nagurney.john@mgh.harvard.edu

References

Hide All
1.Fineberg, HV, Scadden, D, Goldman, L. Care of patients with a low probability of acute myocardial infarction. Cost effectiveness of alternatives to coronary-care-unit admission. N Engl J Med 1984;310:1301–7, doi:10.1056/NEJM198405173102006.
2.Lee, TH, Rouan, GW, Weisberg, MC, et al. Clinical characteristics and natural history of patients with acute myocardial infarction sent home from the emergency room. Am J Cardiol 1987;60:219–24, doi:10.1016/0002-9149(87)90217-7.
3.Hollander, JE, Sease, KL, Sparano, DM, et al. Effects of neural network feedback to physicians on admit/discharge decision for emergency department patients with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med 2004;44:199205, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.02.037.
4.Goldman, L, Cook, EF, Brand, DA, et al. A computer protocol to predict myocardial infarction in emergency department patients with chest pain. N Engl J Med 1988;318:797803, doi:10.1056/NEJM198803313181301.
5.Pope, JH, Aufderheide, TP, Ruthazer, R, et al. Missed diagnoses of acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1163–70, doi:10.1056/NEJM200004203421603.
6.Rusnak, RA, Stair, TO, Hansen, K, et al. Litigation against the emergency physician: common features in cases of missed myocardial infarction. Ann Emerg Med 1989;18:1029–34, doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(89)80924-2.
7.Tatum, JL, Jesse, RL, Kontos, MC, et al. Comprehensive strategy for the evaluation and triage of the chest pain patient. Ann Emerg Med 1997;29:116–25, doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(97)70317-2.
8.Baxt, WG, Shofer, FS, Sites, FD, et al. A neural network aid for the early diagnosis of cardiac ischemia in patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med 2002;40:575–83, doi:10.1067/mem.2002.129171.
9.Baxt, WG, Shofer, FS, Sites, FD, et al. A neural computational aid to the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Ann Emerg Med 2002;39:366–73, doi:10.1067/mem.2002.122705.
10.Goldman, L, Kirtane, AJ. Triage of patients with acute chest pain and possible cardiac ischemia: the elusive search for diagnostic perfection. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:987–95.
11.Christenson, J, Innes, G, McKnight, D, et al. A clinical prediction rule for early discharge of patients with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med 2006;47:110, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.08.007.
12.Goldman, L, Cook, EF, Johnson, PA, et al. Prediction of the need for intensive care in patients who come to the emergency departments with acute chest pain. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1498–504, doi:10.1056/NEJM199606063342303.
13.Selker, HP, Beshansky, JR, Griffith, JL, et al. Use of the Acute Cardiac Ischemia Time-Insensitive Predictive Instrument (ACI-TIPI) to assist with triage of patients with chest pain or other symptoms suggestive of acute cardiac ischemia. A multicenter, controlled clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 1998;129:845–55.
14.Pollack, CV Jr, Sites, FD, Shofer, FS, et al. Application of the TIMI risk score for unstable angina and non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome to an unselected emergency department chest pain population. Acad Emerg Med 2006;13:13–8, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2006.tb00978.x.
15.Antman, EM, Cohen, M, Bernink, PJ, et al. The TIMI riskscore for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: a method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. JAMA 2000;284:835–42, doi:10.1001/jama.284.7.835.
16.Chase, M, Robey, JL, Zogby, KE, et al. Prospective validation of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score in the emergency department chest pain population. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:252–9, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.01.032.
17.Swap, CJ, Nagurney, JT. Value and limitations of chest pain history in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2005;294:2623–9, doi:10.1001/jama.294.20.2623.
18.Holmvang, L, Hasbak, P, Clemmensen, P, et al. Differences between local investigator and core laboratory interpretation of the admission electrocardiogram in patients with unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (a Thrombin Inhibition in Myocardial Ischemia [TRIM] substudy). Am J Cardiol 1998;82:5460, doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00226-4.
19.Salerno, SM, Alguire, PC, Waxman, HS. Competency in interpretation of 12-lead electrocardiograms: a summary andappraisal of published evidence. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:751–60.
20.Brady, WJ, Perron, A, Ullman, E. Errors in emergency physician interpretation of ST-segment elevation in emergency department chest pain patients. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:1256–60, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00471.x.
21.Jayes, RL Jr, Larsen, GC, Beshansky, JR, et al. Physician electrocardiogram reading in the emergency department—accuracy and effect on triage decisions: findings from a multicenter study. J Gen Intern Med 1992;7:387–92, doi:10.1007/BF02599153.
22.Snoey, ER, Housset, B, Guyon, P, et al. Analysis of emergency department interpretation of electrocardiograms. J Accid Emerg Med 1994;11:149–53, doi:10.1136/emj.11.3.149.
23.Ting, HH, Lee, TH, Soukup, JR, et al. Impact of physician experience on triage of emergency room patients with acute chest pain at three teaching hospitals. Am J Med 1991;91:401–8, doi:10.1016/0002-9343(91)90158-T.
24.Cahan, A, Gilon, D, Manor, O, et al. Clinical experience did not reduce the variance in physicians’ estimates of pretest probability in a cross-sectional survey. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:1211–6, doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.014.
25.Farmer, SA, Higginson, IJ. Chest pain: physician perceptions and decision-making in a London emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:7785, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.12.002.
26.Reilly, BM, Evans, AT, Schaider, JJ, et al. Triage of patients with chest pain in the emergency department: a comparative study of physicians’ decisions. Am J Med 2002;112:95103, doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(01)01054-3.
27.Mitchell, AM, Garvey, JL, Chandra, A, et al. Prospective multicenter study of quantitative pretest probability assessment to exclude acute coronary syndrome for patients evaluated in emergency department chest pain units. Ann Emerg Med 2006;47:447, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.10.013.
28.Pearson, SD, Goldman, L, Orav, EJ, et al. Triage decisions for emergency department patients with chest pain: do physicians’ risk attitudes make the difference? J Gen Intern Med 1995;10:557–64, doi:10.1007/BF02640365.
29.Katz, DA, Williams, GC, Brown, RL, et al. Emergency physicians’ fear of malpractice in evaluating patients with possible acute cardiac ischemia. Ann Emerg Med 2005;46:525–33, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.04.016.
30.Green, AR, Carney, DR, Pallin, DJ, et al. Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for black and white patients. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22:1231–8, doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5.
31.Hoffmann, U, Bamberg, F, Chae, CU, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography for early triage of patients with acute chest pain: The ROMICAT (Rule Out Myocardial Infarction Using Computer Assisted Tomography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1642–50, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.052.
32.Hoffmann, U, Nagurney, JT, Moselewski, F, et al. Coronary multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of patients with acute chest pain. Circulation 2006;114:2251–60, doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.634808.
33.Braunwald, E. Unstable angina. A classification. Circulation 1989;80:410–4, doi:10.1161/01.CIR.80.2.410.
34.Hamm, CW, Braunwald, E. A classification of unstable angina revisited. Circulation 2000;102:118–22.
35.Thygesen, KA, Alpert, JS. The definitions of acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, and unstable angina. Curr Cardiol Rep 2001;3:268–72, doi:10.1007/s11886-001-0079-9.
36.Hoffmann, U, Pena, AJ, Moselewski, F, et al. MDCT in early triage of patients with acute chest pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1240–7, doi:10.2214/AJR.05.2240.
37.Brieger, D, Fox, KA, Fitzgerald, G, et al. Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Investigators. Predicting freedom from clinical events in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: the global registry of acute coronary events. Heart 2009;95:888–94, doi:10.1136/hrt.2008.153387.
38.Mieres, JH, Makaryus, AN, Redberg, RF, et al. Noninvasive cardiac imaging. Am Fam Physician 2007;75:1219–28.
39.Morrow, DA, Sabatine, MS, Brennan, ML, et al. Concurrent evaluation of novel cardiac biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome: myeloperoxidase and soluble CD40 ligand and the risk of recurrent ischaemic events in TACTICS-TIMI 18. Eur Heart J 2008;29:1096–102.
40.Slater, DK, Hlatky, MA, Mark, DB, et al. Outcome in suspected acute myocardial infarction with normal or minimally abnormal admission electrocardiographic findings. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60: 766–70, doi:10.1016/0002-9149(87)91020-4.
41.Rouan, GW, Lee, TH, Cook, EF, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcome of acute myocardial infarction in patients with initially normal or non-specific electrocardiograms (a report from the multicenter chest pain study). Am J Cardiol 1989;64:1087–92, doi:10.1016/0002-9149(89)90857-6.
42.Erling, BF, Perron, AD, Brady, WJ. Disagreement in the interpretation of electrocardiographic ST segment elevation: a source of error for emergency physicians? Am J Emerg Med 2004; 22: 6570, doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2003.12.004.
43.Keller, T, Zeller, T, Peetz, D, et al. Sensitive troponin I assay in early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2009;361:868–77, doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0903515.
44.Morrow, DA. Clinical application of sensitive troponin assays. N Engl J Med 2009;361:913–5, doi:10.1056/NEJMe0905790.
45.Ekelund, U, Forberg, JL. New methods for improved evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department. Postgrad Med J 2008;84:83–6.

Keywords

Emergency physician estimates of the probability of acute coronary syndrome in a cohort of patients enrolled in a study of coronary computed tomographic angiography

  • Chuen Peng Lee (a1), Udo Hoffmann (a2), Fabian Bamberg (a2), David F. Brown (a3), Yuchaio Chang (a4), Clifford Swap (a3), Blair A. Parry (a3) and John T. Nagurney (a3)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed