Key result
Outpatient cardiac troponin testing for suspected MI frequently lacked appropriate follow-up, with only 77% of patients receiving an ECG and 13.1% being sent to the emergency department.
Why the study?
Although cardiac troponin may be useful for evaluating chronic conditions in the outpatient setting, little is known about outpatient ordering patterns, patterns of care, and outcomes.
What are the patterns of care and outcomes for patients evaluated with cardiac troponin in the outpatient setting?
Observational (n=228)
No
What are the patterns of care and outcomes for patients evaluated with cardiac troponin in the outpatient setting?
Outpatient cardiac troponin testing for suspected MI is frequently not accompanied by appropriate ECG evaluation or ED referral, highlighting a need for improved practice patterns.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Suggests care gaps in outpatient troponin evaluation; leaves open whether targeted interventions improve outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Cardiac troponin (cTn) measurement is useful for diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI), particularly in the inpatient setting. A growing body of literature suggests that cTn may be useful for evaluating chronic conditions in the outpatient environment; however, little is known regarding cTn ordering patterns in this setting. We sought to investigate patterns of care and outcomes for patients evaluated with cTn in the outpatient setting. We hypothesized that a majority of outpatient cTn orders would be for the purpose of diagnosing possible MI. METHODS: We analyzed 228 patients who had outpatient orders for standard-sensitivity troponin T assays placed at our institution between January 1, 2013 and December 18, 2015. Data were divided into two cohorts based on the intended utility of cTn measurement: orders placed to evaluate for possible MI versus orders placed for some other purpose. In the suspected MI cohort, an electrocardiogram was obtained in only 77% of patients, and only 13.1% were sent to the emergency department (ED) for further evaluation. Within the suspected MI cohort, 10.5% (n = 17) had elevated cTn and the majority of these patients (n = 10) were not sent to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of outpatient cTn orders were intended to evaluate for MI, although electrocardiograms were frequently not ordered and few patients were sent for further ED evaluation. Providers should be encouraged to use cTn testing in a manner that minimizes the potential risk to patients with possible MI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ross et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Suspected myocardial infarction in the outpatient setting (n=228). Cardiac troponin testing for suspected MI vs. Cardiac troponin testing for other purposes was evaluated on Referral to the emergency department for further evaluation. Outpatient cardiac troponin testing for suspected MI frequently lacked appropriate follow-up, with only 77% of patients receiving an ECG and 13.1% being sent to the emergency department.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: