Search

Background: Identifying and eliminating racial health care disparities is a public health priority. However, data evaluating race differences in emergency department (ED) chest pain care are limited. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the High‐Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T to Optimize Chest Pain Risk Stratification (STOP‐CP) cohort, which prospectively enrolled adults with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome without ST‐elevation from eight EDs in the United States from 2017 to 2018. Race was self‐reported by patients and abstracted from health records. Rates of 30‐day noninvasive testing (NIT), cardiac catheterization, revascularization, and adjudicated cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) were determined. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between race and 30‐day outcomes with and without adjustment for potential confounders. Results: Among 1454 participants, 42.3% (615/1454) were non‐White. At 30 days NIT occurred in 31.4% (457/1454), cardiac catheterization in 13.5% (197/1454), revascularization in 6.0% (87/1454), and cardiac death or MI in 13.1% (190/1454). Among Whites versus non‐Whites, NIT occurred in 33.8% (284/839) versus 28.1% (173/615; odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61–0.96) and catheterization in 15.9% (133/839) versus 10.4% (64/615; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45–0.84). After covariates were adjusted for, non‐White race remained associated with decreased 30‐day NIT (adjusted OR [aOR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.56–0.90) and cardiac catheterization (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43–0.88). Revascularization occurred in 6.9% (58/839) of Whites versus 4.7% (29/615) of non‐Whites (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42–1.04). Cardiac death or MI at 30 days occurred in 14.2% of Whites (119/839) versus 11.5% (71/615) of non‐Whites (OR 0.79 95% CI 0.57–1.08). After adjustment there was still no association between race and 30‐day revascularization (aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45–1.20) or cardiac death or MI (aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.50–1.09). Conclusions: In this U.S. cohort, non‐White patients were less likely to receive NIT and cardiac catheterization compared to Whites but had similar rates of revascularization and cardiac death or MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiac arrest guidelines recommend epinephrine every 3–5 minutes during cardiac arrest resuscitation. However, it is unclear if multiple epinephrine doses are associated with improved outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine if a single-dose epinephrine protocol was associated with improved survival compared to traditional multidose protocols. We conducted a pre-post study across five North Carolina EMS agencies from 11/1/2016 to 10/29/2019. Patients ≥18 years old with attempted resuscitation for non-traumatic prehospital cardiac arrest were included. Data were collected 1 year before and after implementation of the single-dose epinephrine protocol. Prior to implementation, all agencies used a multidose epinephrine protocol. The Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES) was used to obtain patient outcomes. Study outcomes were survival to hospital discharge (primary) and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Analysis was by intention to treat. Outcomes were compared pre- vs. post-implementation using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within EMS agencies. Adjusted analyses included age, sex, race, shockable vs. non-shockable rhythm, witnessed arrest, automatic external defibrillator availability, EMS response interval, and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation. During the study period there were 1,690 encounters (899 pre- and 791 post-implementation). The population was 74.7% white, 61.1% male, and had a median age of 65 (IQR 53–76) years. Survival to hospital discharge was similar pre- vs. post-implementation [13.6% (122/899) vs. 15.4% (122/791); OR 1.19, 95%CI 0.89–1.59]. However, ROSC was more common post-implementation [42.3% (380/899) vs. 32.5% (257/791); OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.54–0.81]. After adjusting for covariates, the single-dose protocol was associated with similar survival to discharge rates (aOR 0.88, 95%CI 0.77–1.29), but with decreased ROSC rates (aOR 0.58, 95%CI 0.47–0.72). A prehospital single-dose epinephrine protocol was associated with similar survival to hospital discharge, but decreased ROSC rates compared to the traditional multidose epinephrine protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rural patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may be less likely to receive prompt reperfusion therapy. This study's primary objective was to compare rural versus urban time intervals among a national cohort of prehospital patients with STEMI. The ESO Data Collaborative (Austin, TX), containing records from 1,366 emergency medical services agencies, was queried for adult 9-1-1 responses with suspected STEMI from 1/1/2018-12/31/2019. The scene address for each encounter was classified as either urban or rural using the 2010 US Census Urban Area Zip Code Tabulation Area relationship. The primary outcome was total EMS interval (9-1-1 call to hospital arrival); a key secondary outcome was the proportion of responses that had EMS intervals under 60 minutes. Generalized estimating equations were used to determine whether rural versus urban differences in interval outcomes occurred when adjusting for loaded mileage (distance from scene to hospital) and patient and clinical encounter characteristics. Of 15,915,027 adult 9-1-1 transports, 23,655 records with suspected STEMI were included in the analysis. Most responses (91.6%, n = 21,661) occurred in urban settings. Median EMS interval was 37.6 minutes (IQR 30.0-48.0) in urban settings compared to 57.0 minutes (IQR 46.5-70.7) in rural settings (p < 0.01). Urban responses more frequently had EMS intervals <60 minutes (89.5%, n = 19,130), compared to rural responses (55.5%, n = 1,100, p < 0.01). After adjusting for loaded mileage, age, sex, race/ethnicity, abnormal vital signs, pain assessment, aspirin administration, and IV/IO attempt, rural location was associated with a 5.8 (95%CI 4.2-7.4) minute longer EMS interval than urban, and rural location was associated with a reduced chance of achieving EMS interval < 60 minutes (OR 0.40; 95%CI 0.33-0.49) as compared to urban location. In this large national sample, rural location was associated with significantly longer EMS interval for patients with suspected STEMI, even after accounting for loaded mileage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The HEART Pathway is a validated protocol for risk stratifying emergency department (ED) patients with possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Its performance in different age groups is unknown. The objective of this study is to evaluate its safety and effectiveness among older adults. Methods: A pre‐planned subgroup analysis of the HEART Pathway implementation study was conducted. This prospective interrupted time series accrued adult ED patients with possible ACS who were without ST‐elevation across three US sites from 11/2013–01/2016. After implementation, providers prospectively used the HEART Pathway to stratify patients as low‐risk or non‐low‐risk. Patients were classified as older adults (≥65 years), middle‐aged (46–64 years), and young (21–45 years). Primary safety and effectiveness outcomes were 30‐day death or MI and hospitalization at 30 days, determined from health records, insurance claims, and death index data. Fisher's exact test compared low‐risk proportions between groups. Sensitivity for 30‐day death or MI and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for hospitalization and objective cardiac testing were calculated. Results: The HEART Pathway implementation study accrued 8474 patients, of which 26.9% (2281/8474) were older adults, 45.5% (3862/8474) middle‐aged, and 27.5% (2331/8474) were young. The HEART Pathway identified 7.4% (97/1303) of older adults, 32.0% (683/2131) of middle‐aged, and 51.4% (681/1326) of young patients as low‐risk (p < 0.001). The HEART Pathway was 98.8% (95% CI 97.1–100) sensitive for 30‐day death or MI among older adults. Following implementation, the rate of 30‐day hospitalization was similar among older adults (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00–1.55) and cardiac testing increased (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.04–1.51). Conclusion: The HEART Pathway identified fewer older adults as low‐risk and did not decrease hospitalizations in this age group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The high-sensitivity HEART pathway (hs-HP) risk stratifies emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain. It is unknown if its safety and effectiveness vary by sex or race., Methods: We conducted a subgroup analysis of the hs-HP implementation study, a pre-post interrupted time series at five US EDs. The pre-implementation period (January 2019 to April 2020) utilized the traditional HEART pathway with contemporary troponin (Siemens) and the post-implementation period (November 2020 to February 2022) used the hs-HP using hs-cTnI (Beckman Coulter). Patients were risk-stratified using the hs-HP to rule-out, observation, and rule-in groups. Safety and effectiveness outcomes were 30-day all-cause mortality or myocardial infarction (MI) and 30-day hospitalization., Results: Twenty-six thousand and one hundred twenty-six patients were accrued (12 317 pre- and 13 809 post-implementation), of which 35.3% were non-White and 52.7% were female. Among 9703 patients with complete hs-HP assessments, 48.6% of White and 55.4% of non-White patients were ruled-out (p < 0.001). Additionally, 47.3% of males and 54.4% of females were ruled-out (p < 0.001). Among rule-out patients, 0.3% of White versus 0.3% of non-White patients (p = 0.98) and 0.3% of females versus males 0.3% (p = 0.90) experienced 30-day death or MI. Post-implementation, 30-day hospitalization decreased 17.2% among White patients (aOR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.45-0.52), 14.1% among non-White patients (aOR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.48-0.59), 15.6% among females (aOR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.46-0.54), and 16.6% among males (aOR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.47-0.56). The interactions for 30-day hospitalization between hs-HP implementation and race (p = 0.10) and sex (p = 0.69) were not significant., Conclusions: The hs-HP safely decreases 30-day hospitalizations regardless of sex or race. However, it classifies more non-White patients and women to the rule-out group., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC.)

Background: To determine if the European Society of Cardiology 0/1-hour (ESC 0/1-h) algorithm with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) meets the ≥99% negative predictive value (NPV) safety threshold for 30-day cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) in older, middle-aged and young subgroups., Methods: We conducted a subgroup analysis of adult emergency department patients with chest pain prospectively enrolled from eight US sites (January 2017 to September 2018). Patients were stratified into rule-out, observation and rule-in zones using the hs-cTnT ESC 0/1-h algorithm and classified as older (≥65 years), middle aged (46-64 years) or young (21-45 years). Patients had 0-hour and 1-hour hs-cTnT measures (Roche Diagnostics) and a History, ECG, Age, Risk factor and Troponin (HEART) score. Fisher's exact tests compared rule-out and 30-day cardiac death or MI rates between ages. NPVs with 95% CIs were calculated for the ESC 0/1-h algorithm with and without the HEART score., Results: Of 1430 participants, 26.9% (385/1430) were older, 57.4% (821/1430) middle aged and 15.7% (224/1430) young. Cardiac death or MI at 30 days occurred in 12.8% (183/1430). ESC 0/1-h algorithm ruled out 35.6% (137/385) of older, 62.1% (510/821) of middle-aged and 79.9% of (179/224) young patients (p<0.001). NPV for 30-day cardiac death or MI was 97.1% (95% CI 92.7% to 99.2%) among older patients, 98.4% (95% CI 96.9% to 99.3%) in middle-aged patients and 99.4% (95% CI 96.9% to 100%) among young patients. Adding a HEART score increased NPV to 100% (95% CI 87.7% to 100%) for older, 99.2% (95% CI 97.2% to 99.9%) for middle-aged and 99.4% (95% CI 96.6% to 100%) for young patients., Conclusions: In older and middle-aged adults, the hs-cTnT ESC 0/1-h algorithm was unable to reach a 99% NPV for 30-day cardiac death or MI unless combined with a HEART score., Trial Registration Number: NCT02984436., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ACS receives funding from Abbott, HRSA (1H2ARH399760100) and AHRQ (R01HS029017). JS receives research funding from HRSA (H2ARH39976-01-00), The Duke Endowment, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Forest Devices, Vifor Pharma and Chiesi Farmaceutici. SAM receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, QuidelOrtho, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, The Duke Endowment, Beckman Coulter, Comprehensive Research Associates, Brainbox, HRSA (1H2ARH399760100) and AHRQ (R01HS029017). He is a consultant for Roche, QuidelOrtho, Abbott, Siemens, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer and Amgen and is the chief medical officer for Impathiq. BA receives research funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Siemens and Beckman Coulter. He is a consultant for Roche Diagnostics. BM has research support from the NIH (5K08HL130546) and Roche Diagnostics. She has served as a consultant for Roche Diagnostics. JM receives research funding/support from Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories and Siemens. He is a consultant for Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics and Siemens. RGW received research funding from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Lilly USA, BioAge Labs, Roche Diagnostics, Global Blood Therapeutics, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Egetis Therapeutics, EndPoint Health, Blade Therapeutics, Janssen R&D, ProvePharma and Pfizer. He has received research funding from CoapTech through an NIH/NIDDK grant (R44DK115325). He has received research support in the form of equipment and supplies from Cepheid and Eldon Biologicals. He is an uncompensated advisor to CSL Behring. RC is a consultant for and receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers, Beckman Coulter Diagnostics, Becton Dickinson and Co, Quidel and Sphingotec., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The American College of Cardiology (ACC) recently published an Expert Consensus Decision Pathway for chest pain., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to validate the ACC Pathway in a multisite U.S., Methods: An observational cohort study of adults with possible acute coronary syndrome was conducted. Patients were accrued from 5 U.S. Emergency Departments (November 1, 2020, to July 31, 2022). ECGs and 0- and 2-hour high-sensitivity troponin (Beckman Coulter) measures were used to stratify patients according to the ACC Pathway. The primary safety outcome was 30-day all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI). Efficacy was defined as the proportion stratified to the rule-out zone. Negative predictive value for 30-day death or MI was assessed among the whole cohort and in a subgroup of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) (prior MI, revascularization, or ≥70% coronary stenosis)., Results: ACC Pathway assessments were complete in 14,395 patients, of whom 51.7% (7,437 of 14,395) were women with a median age of 56 years (Q1-Q3: 44-68 years). Known CAD was present in 23.5% (3,386 of 14,395) and 30-day death or MI occurred in 8.1% (1,168 of 14,395). The ACC Pathway had an efficacy of 48.1% (95% CI: 47.3%-49.0%). Among patients in the rule-out zone, 0.3% (22 of 6,930) had death or MI at 30 days, yielding a negative predictive value of 99.7% (95% CI: 99.5%-99.8%). In patients with known CAD, 20.0% (676 of 3,386) were classified to the rule-out zone, of whom 1.5% (10 of 676) had death or MI., Conclusions: The ACC expert consensus decision pathway was safe and efficacious. However, it may not be safe for use among patients with known CAD., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded internally by Wake Forest University Health Systems. The Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute, supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through UL1TR001420. Dr Mahler has received funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, QuidelOrtho Clinical Diagnostics, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Beckman Coulter, Brainbox, AHRQ (R01HS029017 and R21HS029234), The Duke Endowment, National Foundation of Emergency Medicine, and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100); is a consultant for Roche, Abbott, Siemens, QuidelOrtho, Genetesis, Inflammatix, and Radiometer; and is the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. Dr Ashburn has received funding from AHRQ (R01HS029017). Dr Supples has received funding from the National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001420), HRSA (1H2ARH399760100), and the National Foundation of Emergency Medicine. Dr Snavely has received funding from Abbott Laboratories, AHRQ (R01HS029017), and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Delays in care for patients with acute cardiac complaints are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to quantify rural and urban differences in prehospital time intervals for patients with cardiac complaints., Methods: The ESO Data Collaborative dataset consisting of records from 1332 EMS agencies was queried for 9-1-1 encounters with acute cardiac problems among adults (age ≥ 18) from 1/1/2013-6/1/2018. Location was classified as rural or urban using the 2010 United States Census. The primary outcome was total prehospital time. Generalized estimating equations evaluated differences in the average times between rural and urban encounters while controlling for age, sex, race, transport mode, loaded mileage, and patient stability., Results: Among 428,054 encounters, the median age was 62 (IQR 50-75) years with 50.7% female, 75.3% white, and 10.3% rural. The median total prehospital, response, scene, and transport times were 37.0 (IQR 29.0-48.0), 6.0 (IQR 4.0-9.0), 16.0 (IQR 12.0-21.0), and 13.0 (IQR 8.0-21.0) minutes. Rural patients had an average total prehospital time that was 16.76 min (95%CI 15.15-18.38) longer than urban patients. After adjusting for covariates, average total time was 5.08 (95%CI 4.37-5.78) minutes longer for rural patients. Average response and transport time were 4.36 (95%CI 3.83-4.89) and 0.62 (95%CI 0.33-0.90) minutes longer for rural patients. Scene time was similar in rural and urban patients (0.09 min, 95%CI -0.15-0.33)., Conclusion: Rural patients with acute cardiac complaints experienced longer prehospital time than urban patients, even after accounting for other key variables, such as loaded mileage., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Every year drowning is responsible for 7% of injury-related deaths worldwide, making it the third leading cause of unintentional injury-related death. However, in the United States, little is known regarding the prehospital presentation and management of these patients. The purpose of this study was to describe the drowning population in the United States, with a focus on prehospital time intervals, transport, and cardiac arrest frequency., Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed querying records from emergency medical services encounters across the United States over 30 mo (January 2016 to July 2018) using the ESO (Austin, TX) national emergency medical services data registry. Patients with a dispatch or chief complaint of drowning were included. Descriptive statistics, binomial proportion tests, and general linear and logistic regression models were used., Results: There were 1859 encounters that met the study criteria. Median age was 18 y (n=1855, LQ-UQ 4-46). Pediatric patients accounted for 50% (n=919, 95% CI 47-52). Cardiac arrest occurred in 29% (n=537, 95% CI 27-31), and return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 37% (n=186, 95% CI 32-41). Times were 8±5, 19±17, and 15±10 min (mean±SD) for arrival, on-scene, and transport times, respectively., Conclusions: This national prehospital drowning study demonstrated that despite an 18% fatality rate in drowning encounters, patients were more likely to have return of spontaneous circulation when compared to the overall prehospital national average, with rates higher in pediatric patients. Future studies with outcomes data should focus on identifying factors that improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation success rates., (Copyright © 2021 Wilderness Medical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The HEART Pathway combines a History ECG Age Risk factor (HEAR) score and serial troponins to risk stratify patients with acute chest pain. However, it is unclear whether patients with HEAR scores of < 1 require troponin testing. The objective of this study is to measure the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate among patients with < 1 HEAR scores and determine whether serial troponin testing is needed to achieve a miss rate <1%., Methods: A secondary analysis of the HEART Pathway Implementation Study was conducted. HEART Pathway risk assessments (HEAR scores and serial troponin testing at 0 and 3 hours) were completed by the providers on adult patients with chest pain from three US sites between November 2014 and January 2016. MACE (composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary revascularisation) at 30 days was determined. The proportion of patients with HEAR scores of < 1 diagnosed with MACE within 30 days was calculated. The impact of troponin testing on patients with HEAR scores of < 1 was determined using Net Reclassification Improvement Index (NRI)., Results: Providers completed HEAR assessments on 4979 patients and HEAR scores<1 occurred in 9.0% (447/4979) of patients. Among these patients, MACE at 30 days occurred in 0.9% (4/447; 95% CI 0.2% to 2.3%) with two deaths, two MIs and 0 revascularisations. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for MACE in the HEAR < 1 was 97.8% (95%CI 94.5% to 99.4%) and 99.1% (95% CI 97.7% to 99.8%), respectively, and were not improved by troponin testing. Troponin testing in patients with HEAR < 1 correctly reclassified two patients diagnosed with MACE, and was elevated among seven patients without MACE yielding an NRI of 0.9% (95%CI -0.7 to 2.4%)., Conclusion: These data suggest that patients with HEAR scores of 0 and 1 represent a very low-risk group that may not require troponin testing to achieve a missed MACE rate <1%. Trial registration number NCT02056964., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SAM receives research funding from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Point of Care, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Creavo Medical Technologies, PCORI, AHRQ and NHLBI (1 R01 HL11826301). He is a consultant for Roche Diagnostics and Amgen. SAM is the chief medical officer for Impathiq. JPS receives research funding from Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Point of Care. LS receives research funding from Forest Devices and the NHLBI (1 R01 HL144624-01). CDM receives research funding from Abbott, Siemens, NHLBI 118263, Creavo Medical Technologies., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)