Key result
Nonphysician-led exercise stress testing yields ~4% positive results while improving diagnostic workflow.
Why the study?
Reduced access to exercise stress testing limits early treatment or safe discharge, necessitating feasible nonphysician-led testing models.
Does nonphysician-led exercise stress testing provide effective diagnostic evaluation in low to intermediate risk patients?
Population
2095 low to intermediate risk patients requiring EST in Queensland, Australia
Comparison
Two standardized nonphysician-led EST models with cardiologist immediate reporting
Design
Observational implementation study at two hospitals
Authors
Loading...
Supports nonphysician-led testing feasibility in low-intermediate risk patients; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Observational (n=2,095)
Yes
Does nonphysician-led exercise stress testing provide effective diagnostic evaluation in low to intermediate risk patients?
Nonphysician-led exercise stress testing models are feasible and can facilitate timely identification of cardiac pathologies or safe discharge in low to intermediate risk patients.
Scott et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Low to intermediate risk patients requiring exercise stress testing (n=2,095). Nonphysician-led exercise stress testing was evaluated on Test results (positive, equivocal, inconclusive/submaximal, negative). Two nonphysician-led exercise stress testing models across 2,095 tests yielded 3.5% positive and 85.2% negative results, improving patient flow and timely identification of cardiac pathologies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: