A point-of-care biomarker panel increased successful discharge home compared to standard care (32% vs 13%; OR 3.81, 95% CI 3.01-4.82; p<0.001) in patients with suspected myocardial infarction.
RCT (n=2,243)
randomised
Yes
Does a point-of-care cardiac biomarker panel increase successful discharge home in patients attending the emergency department with acute chest pain due to suspected myocardial infarction?
Using a point-of-care cardiac biomarker panel in the emergency department for suspected MI significantly increases successful early discharge and reduces median length of stay without increasing adverse events.
Odds Ratio: 3.81 (95% CI 3.01–4.82)
Absolute Event Rate: 32% vs 13%
p-value: p=<0.001
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether using a point-of-care cardiac biomarker panel would increase the rate of successful discharge home after emergency department assessment, and affect the use of cardiac tests and treatments, subsequent attendance at or admission to hospital and major adverse events. DESIGN AND SETTING: Pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial in six acute hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending with acute chest pain due to suspected myocardial infarction (N=2243). INTERVENTIONS: Diagnostic assessment using a point-of-care biomarker panel consisting of creatine kinase, myocardial type, myoglobin and troponin I measured at baseline and 90 min compared with standard care without the point-of-care panel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was successful discharge home, defined as having left hospital or awaiting transport home by 4 h after attendance and no major adverse events up to 3 months. Secondary outcome measures included length of stay, use of coronary care, cardiac interventions and inpatient beds, emergency department attendances, subsequent admissions, outpatient visits and major adverse events. RESULTS: Point-of-care panel assessment was associated with an increased rate of successful discharge (358/1125 (32%) vs 146/1118 (13%); OR 3.81, 95% CI 3.01 to 4.82; p<0.001), reduced median length of initial hospital stay (8.8 vs 14.2 h; p<0.001) and greater use of coronary care (50/1125 (4.0%) vs 31/1118 (3.0%); p=0.041), but no difference in mean length of initial stay (29.6 vs 31.7 h; p=0.462), mean inpatient days over follow-up (1.8 vs 1.7; p=0.815) or major adverse events (36 (3%) vs 26 (2%); OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.20; p=0.313). CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care panel assessment increases successful discharge home and reduces median length of stay, but does not alter overall hospital bed use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN37823923.
Goodacre et al. (Do,) führten eine RCT bei akuten Brustschmerzen aufgrund eines vermuteten Myokardinfarkts (n=2.243) durch. Das Point-of-Care-Biomarker-Panel wurde im Vergleich zur Standardversorgung ohne das Point-of-Care-Panel hinsichtlich erfolgreicher Entlassungen bewertet, definiert als die Entlassung aus dem Krankenhaus oder das Warten auf den Heimtransport 4 Stunden nach dem Besuch sowie keine schweren unerwünschten Ereignisse bis zu 3 Monate (OR 3,81, 95% CI 3,01 bis 4,82, p=<0,001). Ein Point-of-Care-Biomarker-Panel erhöhte die erfolgreiche Entlassung nach Hause im Vergleich zur Standardversorgung (32% vs 13%; OR 3,81, 95% CI 3,01-4,82; p<0,001) bei Patienten mit verdächtigem Myokardinfarkt.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: