Key result
General practitioners' action in daily practice for chest pain patients demonstrated a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 72%, and a negative predictive value of 98% for ischaemic heart disease.
Why the study?
Does general practitioners' clinical assessment accurately diagnose ischaemic heart disease in chest pain patients?
Observational (n=516)
Yes
Does general practitioners' clinical assessment accurately diagnose ischaemic heart disease in chest pain patients?
While a GP's clinical assessment of low probability does not safely rule out IHD, their actual clinical actions yield a high negative predictive value (98%), supporting primary care as an appropriate setting for evaluating chest pain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports primary care chest pain evaluation; leaves open need for prospective validation before broader adoption.
Nilsson et al. (2008) conducted an observational in Chest pain (n=516). General practitioners' clinical assessment and action was evaluated on Ischaemic heart disease (IHD). General practitioners' action in daily practice for chest pain patients demonstrated a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 72%, and a negative predictive value of 98% for ischaemic heart disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: