Why the study?
Does a pre-hospital HEART-score predict MACE at 30 days in patients with suspected non-STEMI?
Does a pre-hospital HEART-score predict MACE at 30 days in patients with suspected non-STEMI?
A pre-hospital HEART-score assessed by ambulance nurses using a single hs-cTnT measurement is feasible and strongly predicts 30-day MACE in patients with suspected non-STEMI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports pre-hospital risk stratification by ambulance personnel to triage suspected NSTEMI; leaves open whether this.
Background: Triage of patients with chest pain usually occurs in the hospital emergency room (ER). It has been shown that the HEART-score offers a simple and quick risk-stratification tool for these patients. Additionally the high-sensitive Troponin T (hs-cTnT) provides a great diagnostic accuracy and detection of acute myocardial infarction. Purpose: This study investigated whether a pre-hospital chest pain triage is feasible in terms of early ruling out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the ambulance by ambulance nurses using a single hs-cTnT measurement as to establish the HEART-score. Methods: This is the first, exploratory phase, of two prospective, non-randomized, observational cohort studies, prior to additional training of ambulance nurses. Patients with acute onset chest pain were prospectively evaluated at first medical contact by ambulance nurses including the HEART-score and a hs-cTnT assessment. Follow-up was performed at 30 days in terms of MACE. Results: A pre-hospital HEART-score was determined in 600 chest pain patients without ST-segment elevation. Mean age was 70 years, 38% was female. 140 Patients (23.3%) were classified as low risk, 341 (56.8%) as intermediate and 119 (19.8%) as high risk patients. This corresponded with a significant (p = <0.001) difference in MACE within 30 days of 2.9%; 18.8% and 45.4%, respectively. Also, the pre-hospital HEART-score was a strong predictor of the individual factors of MACE: ACS (p = <0.001), PCI (p=0.001), CABG (p<0.001), death (p=0.02). There were no deaths in the low risk group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tolsma et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: