Key result
HEART score-based triage cuts emergency retention time by ~21 minutes vs conventional triage.
Why the study?
The application effect of HEART score based on time window management in chest pain center triage for acute chest pain patients was unclear.
Does triage based on the HEART score improve triage efficiency and patient satisfaction in acute chest pain patients?
Cohort (n=206)
No
Does triage based on the HEART score improve triage efficiency and patient satisfaction in acute chest pain patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 59.4% vs 80.89%
p-value: p=<0.001
Implementing HEART score-based triage in the emergency department significantly optimizes the triage process, reduces patient wait times, and improves patient satisfaction for acute chest pain.
May shorten acute chest pain triage times; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
目的:探讨基于胸痛中心时间窗管理的HEART评分在急性胸痛患者分级分诊中的应用效果。方法:采用对照研究设计,选择2024年1月~2024年12月某三甲医院急诊科就诊的206例急性胸痛患者,按入院时间分为对照组(常规分诊)和观察组(基于HEART评分分诊)。比较两组分诊耗时、首份心电图时间、医生确诊时间、急诊滞留时间、护士心电图识别能力及患者满意度。结果:与对照组相比,观察组分诊耗时(0.59 ± 0.24 vs 0.64 ± 0.28 min)、医生确诊时间(6.72 ± 3.05 vs 12.73 ± 27.72 min)及急诊滞留时间(59.40 ± 28.25 vs 80.89 ± 54.71 min)缩短(P Objective: To explore the application effect of HEART score based on time window management in chest pain center for triage and classification of acute chest pain patients. Methods: A controlled study design was adopted. 206 acute chest pain patients who visited the emergency department of a tertiary hospital from January 2024 to December 2024 were selected and divided into the control group (conventional triage) and the observation group (triage based on HEART score) according to the admission time. The triage time, time of first electrocardiogram (ECG), time of doctor’s diagnosis, emergency retention time, nurses’ ability to identify abnormal ECGs, and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups. Results: Compared with the control group, the triage time (0.59 ± 0.24 vs 0.64 ± 0.28 min), time of doctor’s diagnosis (6.72 ± 3.05 vs 12.73 ± 27.72 min), and emergency retention time (59.40 ± 28.25 vs 80.89 ± 54.71 min) in the observation group were shortened (P < 0.05); the correct rate of abnormal ECG identification by nurses (91.5% vs 72.0%) and the total satisfaction rate of patients (94.3% vs 76.0%) in the observation group were higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). Conclusion: HEART score based on time window management in chest pain center can optimize the triage process for acute chest pain patients, shorten the emergency retention time, improve the professional ability of nurses and patient satisfaction, and provide certain triage strategies for clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
凰玉 樊 (2025) conducted a cohort in Acute chest pain (n=206). HEART score-based triage vs. Conventional triage was evaluated on Emergency retention time (minutes) (p=<0.001). HEART score-based triage significantly shortened emergency retention time (59.40 vs 80.89 minutes) and improved patient satisfaction compared to conventional triage in patients with acute chest pain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: