PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 29, 2004BMJ273 citationsOpen Access

Randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of a chest pain observation unit compared with routine care

SGSteve Goodacre

Structured PICO

Does care in a chest pain observation unit improve outcomes and reduce hospital admissions in patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain compared with routine care?

P
Population
972 patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain
I
Intervention
Care in a chest pain observation unit
C
Comparator
Routine care
O
Outcome
Proportion of participants admitted to hospital, proportion with acute coronary syndrome sent home inappropriately, major adverse cardiac events over six months, health utility, hospital reattendance and readmission, and costs per patient to the health service

Implementation of a chest pain observation unit in the emergency department significantly reduces hospital admissions and improves health utility without increasing adverse cardiac events.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To measure the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing care in a chest pain observation unit compared with routine care for patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial, with 442 days randomised to the chest pain observation unit or routine care, and cost effectiveness analysis from a health service costing perspective. SETTING: The emergency department at the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 972 patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain (479 attending on days when care was delivered in the chest pain observation unit, 493 on days of routine care) followed up until six months after initial attendance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of participants admitted to hospital, the proportion with acute coronary syndrome sent home inappropriately, major adverse cardiac events over six months, health utility, hospital reattendance and readmission, and costs per patient to the health service. RESULTS: Use of a chest pain observation unit reduced the proportion of patients admitted from 54% to 37% (difference 17%, odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.65, P < 0.001) and the proportion discharged with acute coronary syndrome from 14% to 6% (8%, -7% to 23%, P = 0.264). Rates of cardiac event were unchanged. Care in the chest pain observation unit was associated with improved health utility during follow up (0.0137 quality adjusted life years gained, 95% confidence interval 0.0030 to 0.0254, P = 0.022) and a saving of pound 78 per patient (- pound 56 to pound 210, P = 0.252). CONCLUSIONS: Care in a chest pain observation unit can improve outcomes and may reduce costs to the health service. It seems to be more effective and more cost effective than routine care.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Steve Goodacre (2004) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fd2863180198535449048bhttps://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.37956.664236.ee
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A prospective, observational study of a chest pain observation unit in a British hospital2002 · 70 citations
  2. 2Chest pain units2002 · 52 citations
  3. 3Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 19961996 · 119 citations
  4. 4NICE: faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies2001 · 303 citations
  5. 5Confidence intervals or surfaces? Uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane1998 · 390 citations