Search

William Alley, Simon A Mahler Department of Emergency Medicine, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, USA Abstract: Chest pain is one of the most common presenting complaints in the emergency department, though only a small minority of patients are subsequently diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, missing the diagnosis has potential for significant morbidity and mortality. ACS presentations can be atypical, and their workups are often prolonged and costly. In order to risk-stratify patients and better direct the workup and care given, many decision aids have been developed. While each may have merit in certain clinical settings, the most useful aid in the emergency department is one that finds all cases of ACS while also identifying a substantial subset of patients at low risk who can be discharged without stress testing or coronary angiography. This review describes several of the chest pain decision aids developed and studied through the recent past, starting with the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores, which were developed as prognostic aids for patients already diagnosed with ACS, then subsequently validated in the undifferentiated chest pain population. Asia-Pacific Evaluation of Chest Pain Trial (ASPECT); Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol to Assess Patients With Chest Pain Symptoms Using Contemporary Troponins (ADAPT); North American Chest Pain Rule (NACPR); and History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, Troponin (HEART) score have been developed exclusively for use in the undifferentiated chest pain population as well, with improved performance compared to their predecessors. This review describes the relative merits and limitations of these decision aids so that providers can determine which tool fits the needs of their clinical practice setting. Keywords: chest pain, decision aid, risk score, acute coronary syndrome

Background: Chest pain, a common emergency department 35 (ED) presentation, requires rapid evaluation. Optical technology-based non-invasive wearable devices (Infrasensor, RCE, Carlsbad, CA) rapidly and transcutaneously assesses cardiac Troponin I (cTnI)., Objectives: To perform a pilot study describing the performance of the Infrasensor in cTnI defined cohorts., Methods: This was a 10-hospital prospective observational study in healthy US subjects with a normal cTnI, and in patients with an elevated local cTnI. Healthy subjects were without disease, defined by a negative questionnaire and bloodwork, had a 3-minute Infrasensor measurement and blood samples for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), n-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP), creatinine, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Elevated cTnI's patients had the same Infrasensor and blood sample measurements. Using a cross validation technique, a cTnI based binary classification model that did, and did not, include age was trained with 80%, and validated on 20% (n=168; elevated hs-cTnI equally distributed across 5 folds) of the overall cohort., Results: Of 840 patients, 727 (87.5%) were non-elevated cTnI controls and the remainder, n=113, had elevated cTnI. Median (25th, 75th percentiles) age was 61 (52, 71) and 48 (32, 57) years for the elevated and healthy control cohorts, respectively. Overall, 50.5% were female, with 29.2% and 52.7% in the elevated and non-elevated troponin cohorts respectively. Overall, the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values of the Infrasensor for identifying an elevated cTnI were 0.9, 0.7, 0.98 and 0.48 respectively, with a C-statistic of 0.90 (0.89-0.99)., Conclusions: The Infrasensor identifies elevated cTnI within 3 minutes of application.

Background: Data comparing the performance of sex-specific to overall (non-sex-specific) high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) cut-points for diagnosing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are limited. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of sex-specific versus overall 99th percentile high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) cut-points., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the STOP-CP cohort, which prospectively enrolled emergency department patients ≥ 21 years old with symptoms suggestive of ACS without ST-elevation on initial electrocardiogram across eight U.S. sites (January 25, 2017-September 6, 2018). Participants with both 0- and 1-h hs-cTnT measures less than or equal to the 99th percentile (sex-specific 22 ng/L for males, 14 ng/L for females; overall 19 ng/L) were classified into the rule-out group. The safety outcome was adjudicated cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. Efficacy was defined as the proportion classified to the rule-out group. McNemar's test and a generalized score statistic were used to compare rule-out and 30-day cardiac death or MI rates between strategies. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) index was used to further compare performance., Results: This analysis included 1430 patients, of whom 45.8% (655/1430) were female; the mean ± SD age was 57.6 ± 12.8 years. At 30 days, cardiac death or MI occurred in 12.8% (183/1430). The rule-out rate was lower using sex-specific versus overall cut-points (70.6% [1010/1430] vs. 72.5% [1037/1430]; p = 0.003). Among rule-out patients, the 30-day cardiac death or MI rates were similar for sex-specific (2.4% [24/1010]) vs. overall (2.3% [24/1037]) strategies (p = 0.79). Among patients with cardiac death or MI, sex-specific versus overall cut-points correctly reclassified three females and incorrectly reclassified three males. The sex-specific strategy resulted in a net of 27 patients being incorrectly reclassified into the rule-in group. This led to an NRI of -2.2% (95% CI -5.1% to 0.8%)., Conclusions: Sex-specific hs-cTnT cut-points resulted in fewer patients being ruled out without an improvement in safety compared to the overall cut-point strategy., (© 2024 The Author(s). Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Emergent reperfusion by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 90 minutes of first medical contact (FMC) is indicated in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, long transport times in rural areas in the Southeast US make meeting this goal difficult. The objective of this study was to determine the number of Southeast US residents with prolonged transport times to the nearest 24/7 primary PCI (PPCI) center., Methods: A cross-sectional study of residents in the Southeastern US was conducted based on geographical and 2022 5-Year American Community Survey data. The geographic information system (GIS) ArcGIS Pro was used to estimate Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transport times for Southeast US residents to the nearest PPCI center. All 24/7 PPCI centers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee were included in the analysis, as well as nearby PPCI centers in surrounding states. To identify those at risk of delayed FMC-to-device time, the primary outcome was defined as a >30-minute transport time, beyond which most patients would not have PCI within 90 minutes. A secondary outcome was defined as transport >60 minutes, the point at which FMC-to-device time would be >120 minutes most of the time. These cutoffs are based on national median EMS scene times and door-to-device times., Results: Within the Southeast US, we identified 62,880,528 residents and 350 PPCI centers. Nearly 11 million people living in the Southeast US reside greater than 30 minutes from a PPCI center (17.3%, 10,866,710, +/- 58,143), with 2% (1,271,522 +/- 51,858) living greater than 60 minutes from a PPCI hospital. However, most patients reside in short transport zones; 82.7% (52,013,818 +/- 98,741). Within the Southeast region, 8.4% (52/616) of counties have more than 50% of their population in a long transport zone and 42.3% (22/52) of those have more than 90% of their population in long transport areas., Conclusions: Nearly 11 million people in the Southeast US do not have access to timely PCI for STEMI care. This disparity may contribute to increased morbidity and mortality.

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: A single dose epinephrine protocol (SDEP) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) achieves similar survival to hospital discharge (SHD) rates as a multidose epinephrine protocol (MDEP). However, it is unknown if a SDEP improves SHD rates among patients with a shockable rhythm or those receiving bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)., Methods: This pre-post study, spanning 11/01/2016-10/29/2019 at 5 North Carolina EMS systems, compared pre-implementation MDEP and post-implementation SDEP in patients ≥18 years old with non-traumatic OHCA. Data on initial rhythm type, performance of bystander CPR, and the primary outcome of SHD were sourced from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival. We compared SDEP vs MDEP performance in each rhythm (shockable and non-shockable) and CPR (bystander CPR or no bystander CPR) subgroup using Generalized Estimating Equations to account for clustering among EMS systems and to adjust for age, sex, race, witnessed arrest, arrest location, AED availability, EMS response interval, and presence of a shockable rhythm or receiving bystander CPR. The interaction of SDEP implementation with rhythm type and bystander CPR was evaluated., Results: Of 1690 patients accrued (899 MDEP, 791 SDEP), 19.2% (324/1690) had shockable rhythms and 38.9% (658/1690) received bystander CPR. After adjusting for confounders, SHD was increased after SDEP implementation among patients with bystander CPR (aOR 1.61, 95%CI 1.03-2.53). However, SHD was similar in the SDEP cohort vs MDEP cohort among patients without bystander CPR (aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.60-1.09), with a shockable rhythm (aOR 0.96, 95%CI 0.48-1.91), and with a non-shockable rhythm (aOR 1.26, 95%CI 0.89-1.77). In the adjusted model, the interaction between SDEP implementation and bystander CPR was significant for SHD ( p  = 0.002)., Conclusion: Adjusting for confounders, the SDEP increased SHD in patients who received bystander CPR and there was a significant interaction between SDEP and bystander CPR. Single dose epinephrine protocol and MDEP had similar SHD rates regardless of rhythm type.

Background: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-h high sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) algorithm does not differentiate risk based on known coronary artery disease (CAD: prior myocardial infarction [MI], coronary revascularization, or ≥ 70% coronary stenosis). We recently evaluated its performance among patients with known CAD at 30-days, but little is known about its longer-term risk prediction. The objective of this study is to determine and compare the performance of the algorithm at 90-days among patients with and without known CAD., Methods: We performed a pre-planned subgroup analysis of the STOP-CP cohort, which prospectively enrolled ED patients ≥21 years old with symptoms suggestive of ACS without ST-elevation on initial ECG across 8 US sites (1/25/2017-9/6/2018). Participants with 0- and 1-h hs-cTnT measures (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) were stratified into rule-out, observe, and rule-in groups using the ESC 0/1-h algorithm. Algorithm performance was tested among patients with or without known CAD, as determined by the treating provider. The primary outcome was cardiac death or MI at 90-days. Fisher's exact tests were used to compare 90-day event and rule-out rates between patients with and without known CAD. Negative predictive values (NPVs) for 90-day cardiac death or MI with exact 95% confidence intervals were calculated and compared using Fisher's exact test., Results: The STOP-CP study accrued 1430 patients, of which 31.4% (449/1430) had known CAD. Cardiac death or MI at 90 days was more common in patients with known CAD than in those without [21.2% (95/449) vs. 10.0% (98/981); p < 0.001]. Using the ESC 0/1-h algorithm, 39.6% (178/449) of patients with known CAD and 66.1% (648/981) of patients without known CAD were ruled-out (p < 0.001). Among rule-out patients, 90-day cardiac death or MI occurred in 3.4% (6/178) of patients with known CAD and 1.2% (8/648) without known CAD (p = 0.09). NPV for 90-day cardiac death or MI was 96.6% (95%CI 92.8-98.8) among patients with known CAD and 98.8% (95%CI 97.6-99.5) in patients without known CAD (p = 0.09)., Conclusion: Patients with known CAD who were ruled-out using the ESC 0/1-h hs-cTnT algorithm had a high rate of missed 90-day cardiac events, suggesting that the ESC 0/1-h hs-cTnT algorithm may not be safe for use among patients with known CAD., Trial Registration: High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T to Optimize Chest Pain Risk Stratification (STOP-CP; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02984436; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02984436)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Ashburn receives funding from AHRQ (R01HS029017). Dr. Snavely receives funding from Abbott, HRSA (1H2ARH399760100), and AHRQ (R01HS029017). Dr. Stopyra receives research funding from HRSA (H2ARH39976–01-00), AHRQ (R01HS029017), AHRQ (1R21HS029234-01A1), The Duke Endowment, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Forest Devices, Vifor Pharma, and Chiesi Farmaceutici. Dr. Mahler receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, QuidelOrtho, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Beckman Coulter, Genetesis, Cytovale, The Duke Endowment, Brainbox, HRSA (1H2ARH399760100), and AHRQ (R01HS029017). He is a consultant for Roche, Quidel, Abbott, Siemens, Inflammatix, and Radiometer and is the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. Dr. Allen receives research funding/support from RocheDiagnostics, Siemens, and Beckman Coulter. He is a consultant for Roche Diagnostics and Beckman Coulter. Dr. Mumma has research support from the NIH (5K08HL130546) and Roche Diagnostics. Dr. McCord receives research funding/support from Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, and Siemens. He is a consultant for Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens. Dr. Wilkerson received research funding from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly USA, LLC, BioAge Labs, Inc., Roche Diagnostics, Global Blood Therapeutics, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Egetis Therapeutics AB, EndPoint Health, Inc., Blade Therapeutics, Janssen R&D LLC, ProvePharma, Beckton, Dickinson and Company, and Pfizer Inc. He has received research funding from CoapTech, LLC through an NIH/NIDDK grant (R44DK115325). He has received research support in the form of equipment and supplies from Cepheid and Eldon Biologicals A/S. He is an uncompensated advisor to CSL Behring. Dr. Christenson is a consultant for and receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers, Beckman Coulter Diagnostics, Beckton Dickinson and Company, Quidel Corp., and Sphingotec GMBH. The other authors report no conflicts., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Protocols to evaluate for myocardial infarction (MI) using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) have the potential to drive costs upward due to the added sensitivity. We performed an economic evaluation of an accelerated protocol (AP) to evaluate for MI using hs-cTn to identify changes in costs of treatment and length of stay compared with conventional testing., Methods: We performed a planned secondary economic analysis of a large, cluster randomized trial across nine emergency departments (EDs) from July 2020 to April 2021. Patients were included if they were 18 years or older with clinical suspicion for MI. In the AP, patients could be discharged without further testing at 0 h if they had a hs-cTnI < 4 ng/L and at 1 h if the initial value were 4 ng/L and the 1-h value ≤7 ng/L. Patients in the standard of care (SC) protocol used conventional cTn testing at 0 and 3 h. The primary outcome was the total cost of treatment, and the secondary outcome was ED length of stay., Results: Among 32,450 included patients, an AP had no significant differences in cost (+$89, CI: -$714, $893 hospital cost, +$362, CI: -$414, $1138 health system cost) or ED length of stay (+46, CI: -28, 120 min) compared with the SC protocol. In lower acuity, free-standing EDs, patients under the AP experienced shorter length of stay (-37 min, CI: -62, 12 min) and reduced health system cost (-$112, CI: -$250, $25)., Conclusion: Overall, the implementation of AP using hs-cTn does not result in higher costs., Competing Interests: Joe Miller: Research support and consulting for Beckman Coulter; consulting for Siemens and AstraZeneca. Ben Cook: Research support for Abbott; research support and consulting for Beckman Coulter; research support for Roche. David Lanfear: Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Cytokinetics, DCRI (CONNECT‐HF), Illumina, Janssen, Lilly, Martin Pharmaceuticals, Ortho Diagnostics, Otsuka, Somalogic, Vicardia. Simon Mahler: funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Quidel, and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). He is an advisor for Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Genetesis, Quidel, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. Phil Levy: past chair of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) Accreditation Oversight Committee and a current member of the ACC NCDR Oversight Committee and the NCDR Chest Pain/MI Registry Publications Committee; he was also Vice Chair for the ACC/AHA Chest Pain Guidelines. Dr. Levy has served as a consultant for Quidel, Siemens, Roche Diagnostics, Ortho Diagnostics, Beckman Coulter, Pathfast, and the Baim Institute. James McCord: research support for Roche and Abbott; research support and consulting for Siemens and Beckman Coulter. Nicholas Mills has received honoraria or consultancy from Abbott Diagnostics, Roche Diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers, and LumiraDx, and the University of Edinburgh has received research grants from Abbott Diagnostics and Siemens Healthineers is supported by Chair, Programme and Research Excellence Awards (CH/F/21/90010, RG/20/10/34966, RE/18/5/34216) from the British Heart Foundation. Other coauthors have no disclosures to make., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

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.)

Background: The HEART Pathway (History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk factors, Troponin) can be used with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin to risk stratify emergency department patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. However, data on whether a high-sensitivity HEART Pathway (hs-HP) are safe and effective is lacking., Methods: An interrupted time series study was conducted at 5 North Carolina sites in 26 126 adult emergency department patients being investigated for possible acute coronary syndrome and without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Patients were accrued into 16-month preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts with a 6-month wash-in phase. Preimplementation (January 2019 to April 2020), the traditional HEART Pathway was used with 0- and 3-hour contemporary troponin measures (Siemens). In the postimplementation period (November 2020 to February 2022), a modified hs-HP was used with 0- and 2-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (Beckman Coulter) measures. The primary safety and effectiveness outcomes were 30-day all-cause death or myocardial infarction and 30-day hospitalizations. These outcomes and early discharge rate (emergency department discharge without stress testing or coronary angiography) were determined from health records and death index data. Outcomes were compared preimplementation versus postimplementation using χ 2 tests and multivariable logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders., Results: Preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts included 12 317 and 13 809 patients, respectively, of them 52.7% (13 767/26 126) were female with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range, 42-66). Rates of 30-day death or MI were 6.8% (945/13 809) postimplementation and 7.7% (948/12 317) preimplementation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.90-1.11]). hs-HP implementation was associated with 19.9% (95% CI, 18.7%-21.1%) higher early discharges (post versus pre: 63.6% versus 43.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.22 [95% CI, 2.10-2.35]). The hs-HP was also associated with 16.1% (95% CI, 14.9%-17.3%) lower 30-day hospitalizations (postimplementation versus preimplementation, 31.4% versus 47.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.48-0.54]). Among early discharge patients, death or myocardial infarction occurred in 0.5% (41/8780) postimplementation versus 0.4% (22/5383) preimplementation ( P =0.61)., Conclusions: hs-HP implementation is associated with increased early discharges without increasing adverse events. These findings support the use of a modified hs-HP to improve chest pain care., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Mahler receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, QuidelOrtho, Genetesis, Cytovale, National Foundation of Emergency Medicine, Duke Endowment, Health Resources and Services Administration (1H2ARH399760100), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS029017). Dr Mahler is a consultant for Roche, Abbott, Siemens, QuidelOrtho, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq, Inc. Dr Ashburn receives funding from NHLBI (T32HL076132). Dr Stopyra receives research funding from National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences/National Institutes of Health (KL2TR001421), Health Resources and Services Administration (H2ARH39976-01-00), Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Forest Devices, Vifor Pharma, and Chiesi Farmaceutici. Dr O’Neill receives funding from Cytovale. Dr Snavely receives funding from Abbott Laboratories and Health Resources and Services Administration (1H2ARH399760100).

Background: The diagnostic performance of the high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) 0/2-h algorithm is unclear among U.S. emergency department (ED) patients with acute chest pain., Methods: A preplanned subgroup analysis of the STOP-CP cohort study was conducted. Participants with 0- and 2-h hs-cTnT measures prospectively enrolled at eight U.S. EDs from January 2017 to September 2018 were stratified into rule-out, observation, and rule-in zones using the hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm alone and combined with the history, electrocardiogram, age, and risk factor (HEAR) score. The primary outcome was adjudicated 30-day cardiac death or myocardial infarction (CDMI). The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the 0/2-h rule-out zone and specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of the rule-in zone for 30-day CDMI were calculated., Results: Of the 1307 patients accrued, 53.6% (700/1307) were male and 58.6% (762/1307) were White, with a mean ± SD age of 57.5 ± 12.7 years. At 30 days, CDMI occurred in 12.9% (168/1307) of participants. The 0/2-h algorithm ruled out 61.4% (802/1307) of patients. Among rule-out patients, 1.9% (15/802) experienced 30-day CDMI, resulting in a sensitivity of 91.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 85.7%-94.9%) and NPV of 98.1% (95% CI 96.9%-98.9%). The 0/2-h algorithm ruled in 12.4% (162/1307) patients of whom 61.7% (100/162) experienced 30-day CDMI. The rule-in zone specificity was 94.6% (95% CI 93.1%-95.8%) and PPV was 61.7% (95% CI 53.8%-69.2%) for 30-day CDMI. The 0/2-h algorithm combined with HEAR score ruled out 30.7% (401/1307) of patients with a sensitivity and NPV for 30-day CDMI of 98.2% (95% CI 94.9%-99.6%) and 99.3% (95% CI 97.8%-99.8%), respectively., Conclusions: The hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm ruled out most patients. With NPV of <99% for 30-day CDMI, the hs-cTnT 0/2-h algorithm, many emergency physicians may not consider it safe to use for U.S. ED patients. When combined with a low-risk HEAR score, NPV was >99% for 30-day CDMI at the cost of reduced efficacy., (© 2024 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Diagnosing ischemia in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (sACS) is challenging with equivocal disposition of intermediate risk patients., Objective: Compare sensitivity and specificity of magnetocardiography (MCG) versus standard of care (SOC) stress testing in diagnosing myocardial ischemia., Methods: Multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study. ED patients with sACS and HEART score ≥ 3 underwent 90 s noninvasive MCG to detect myocardial ischemia. Results were blinded to the patient's clinicians. MCGs were read independently by 3 physicians blinded to clinical data. Myocardial ischemia was ≥70 % epicardial coronary artery stenosis, revascularization within 30 days, or 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Time to first test (TTT) and patient satisfaction for MCG and SOC were compared., Results: Of enrolled patients ( N  = 390) (mean age 59 ± 12 years, 45 % female), 99 (25 %) underwent a non-invasive stress test: 42 (14 %) diagnosed with ischemia. MCG sensitivity was 66.7 % (50.5-80.4 %, 95 % CI) and specificity 57.1 % (50.0-63.3 %, 95 % CI) for detecting coronary ischemia. Noninvasive stress testing (stress echo, nuclear stress, and exercise stress) had the same sensitivity 66.7 % (95 % CI 29.9 % to 92.5 %) and a specificity of 89.9 % (95 % CI 81.7-95.3 %). Mean TTT was shorter for MCG, 3.18 h (SD 1.91) vs. SOC stress testing 22.71 (SD 15.23), p  < 0.0001. Mean patient experience was MCG 4.7 versus 3.0 SOC stress testing (p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: MCG provides similar sensitivity and lower specificity as non-invasive stress testing in ED sACS patients. Time to test is shorter for MCG with higher patient satisfaction scores., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Objectives: To assess the in vitro IntelliSep test, a microfluidic assay that quantifies the state of immune activation by evaluating the biophysical properties of leukocytes, as a rapid diagnostic for sepsis., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: Five emergency departments (EDs) in Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, and Washington., Patients: Adult patients presenting to the ED with signs (two of four Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome criteria, where one must be temperature or WBC count) or suspicion (provider-ordered culture) of infection., Interventions: All patients underwent testing with the IntelliSep using ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid-anticoagulated whole blood followed by retrospective adjudication for sepsis by sepsis-3 criteria by a blinded panel of physicians., Measurements and Main Results: Of 599 patients enrolled, 572 patients were included in the final analysis. The result of the IntelliSep test is reported as the IntelliSep Index (ISI), ranging from 0.1 to 10.0, divided into three interpretation bands for the risk of sepsis: band 1 (low) to band 3 (high). The median turnaround time for ISI results was 7.2 minutes. The ISI resulted band 1 in 252 (44.1%), band 2 in 160 (28.0%), and band 3 in 160 (28.0%). Sepsis occurred in 26.6% (152 of 572 patients). Sepsis prevalence was 11.1% (95% CI, 7.5-15.7%) in band 1, 28.1% (95% CI, 21.3-35.8%) in band 2, and 49.4% (95% CI, 41.4-57.4%) in band 3. The Positive Percent Agreement of band 1 was 81.6% and the Negative Percent Agreement of band 3 was 80.7%, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.74. Compared with band 1, band 3 correlated with adverse clinical outcomes, including mortality, and resource utilization., Conclusions: Increasing ISI interpretation band is associated with increasing probability of sepsis in patients presenting to the ED with suspected infection., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

The diagnostic performance of the high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-h algorithm in sex and race subgroups of US Emergency Department (ED) patients is unclear. A pre-planned subgroup analysis of the STOP-CP cohort study was conducted. Participants with 0- and 1-h hs-cTnT measures from eight US EDs (1/2017 to 9/2018) were stratified into rule-out, observation, and rule-in zones using the hs-cTnT ESC 0/1 algorithm. The primary outcome was adjudicated 30-day cardiac death or MI. The proportion with the primary outcome in each zone was compared between subgroups with Fisher's exact tests. The negative predictive value (NPV) of the ESC 0/1 rule-out zone for 30-day CDMI was calculated and compared between subgroups using Fisher's exact tests. Of the 1422 patients enrolled, 54.2% (770/1422) were male and 58.1% (826/1422) white with a mean age of 57.6 ± 12.8 years. At 30 days, cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in 12.9% (183/1422) of participants. Among patients stratified to the rule-out zone, 30-day cardiac death or MI occurred in 1.1% (5/436) of women versus 2.1% (8/436) of men (p = .40) and 1.2% (4/331) of non-white patients versus 1.8% (9/490) of white patients (p = .58). The NPV for 30-day cardiac death or MI was similar among women versus men (98.9% [95% confidence interval, CI: 97.3-99.6] vs. 97.9% [95% CI: 95.9-99.1]; p = .40) and among white versus non-white patients (98.8% [95% CI: 96.9-99.7] vs. 98.2% [95% CI: 96.5-99.2]; p = .39). NPVs <99% in each subgroup suggest the hs-cTnT ESC 0/1-h algorithm may not be safe for use in US EDs. Trial Registration: High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T to Optimize Chest Pain Risk Stratification (STOP-CP; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02984436; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02984436)., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC.)

Background: The objective of this study is to identify patient and EMS agency factors associated with timely reperfusion of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)., Methods: We conducted a cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years old) with STEMI activations from 2016 to 2020. Data was obtained from a regional STEMI registry, which included eight rural county EMS agencies and three North Carolina percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centers. On each patient, prehospital and in-hospital time intervals were abstracted. The primary outcome was the ability to achieve the 90-minute EMS FMC to PCI time goal (yes vs. no). We used generalized estimating equations accounting for within-agency clustering to evaluate the association between patient and agency factors and meeting first medical contact (FMC) to PCI time goal while accounting for clustering within the agency., Results: Among 365 rural STEMI patients 30.1% were female (110/365) with a mean age of 62.5 ± 12.7 years. PCI was performed within the time goal in 60.5% (221/365) of encounters. The FMC to PCI time goal was met in 45.5% (50/110) of women vs 69.8% (178/255) of men ( p  < 0.001). The median PCI center activation time was 12 min (IQR 7-19) in the group that received PCI within the time goal compared to 21 min (IQR 10-37) in the cohort that did not. After adjusting for loaded mileage and other clinical variables (e.g., pulse rate, hypertension etc.), the male sex was associated with an improved chance of meeting the goal of FMC to PCI (aOR: 2.94; 95% CI 2.11-4.10) compared to the female sex., Conclusion: Nearly 40% of rural STEMI patients transported by EMS failed to receive FMC to PCI within 90 min. Women were less likely than men to receive reperfusion within the time goal, which represents an important health care disparity.

Importance: More than 80% of patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with acute heart failure (AHF) are hospitalized. With more than 1 million annual hospitalizations for AHF in the US, safe and effective alternatives are needed. Care for AHF in short-stay units (SSUs) may be safe and more efficient than hospitalization, especially for lower-risk patients, but randomized clinical trial data are lacking., Objective: To compare the effectiveness of SSU care vs hospitalization in lower-risk patients with AHF., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial randomly assigned low-risk patients with AHF 1:1 to SSU or hospital admission from the ED. Patients received follow-up at 30 and 90 days post discharge. The study began December 6, 2017, and was completed on July 22, 2021. The data were analyzed between March 27, 2020, and November 11, 2023., Intervention: Randomized post-ED disposition to less than 24 hours of SSU care vs hospitalization., Main Outcomes and Measures: The study was designed to detect at least 1-day superiority for a primary outcome of days alive and out of hospital (DAOOH) at 30-day follow-up for 534 participants, with an allowance of 10% participant attrition. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment was truncated at 194 participants. Before unmasking, the primary outcome was changed from DAOOH to an outcome with adequate statistical power: quality of life as measured by the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12). The KCCQ-12 scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life., Results: Of the 193 patients enrolled (1 was found ineligible after randomization), the mean (SD) age was 64.8 (14.8) years, 79 (40.9%) were women, and 114 (59.1%) were men. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. The mean (SD) KCCQ-12 summary score between the SSU and hospitalization arms at 30 days was 51.3 (25.7) vs 45.8 (23.8) points, respectively (P = .19). Participants in the SSU arm had 1.6 more DAOOH at 30-day follow-up than those in the hospitalization arm (median [IQR], 26.9 [24.4-28.8] vs 25.4 [22.0-27.7] days; P = .02). Adverse events were uncommon and similar in both arms., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings show that the SSU strategy was no different than hospitalization with regard to KCCQ-12 score, superior for more DAOOH, and safe for lower-risk patients with AHF. These findings of lower health care utilization with the SSU strategy need to be definitively tested in an adequately powered study., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03302910.

Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Ashburn receives funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (T32HL076132). Dr McCord receives research funding and support from Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, and Siemens. He is a consultant for Beckman Coulter, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens. Dr Snavely receives funding from Abbott and Health Resources and Services Administration (1H2ARH399760100). Dr Christenson is a consultant for and receives funding and support from Roche Diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers, Beckman Coulter Diagnostics, Becton Dickinson and Co, Quidel Corp, and Sphingotec GMBH. Dr Apple reports consulting fees from HyTest Ltd., advisory fees from Werfen and Qorvo Biotechnology, nonsalaried grant support through the Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute from Abbott Diagnostics, Abbott POC, Roche Diagnostics, Siemens Healthcare, Quidel, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Becton Dickinson; and fees for serving as Associate Editor for Clinical Chemistry. Dr Peacock received research grants from Brainbox, RCE, and Salix, served as a consultant for Abbott, Brainbox, Instrument Labs, Janssen, Osler, Roche, Siemens, and Vifor, and has stock/ownership interests in AseptiScope Inc, Brainbox Inc, Braincheck Inc, Coagulo Inc, Comprehensive Research Associates LLC, Comprehensive Research Management Inc, Emergencies in Medicine LLC, Fast Inc, Forrest Devices, Ischemia DX LLC, Lucia Inc, Prevencio Inc, RCE Technologies, ROMTech, ScPharma, Trivirum Inc, Upstream Inc. Dr. deFilippi consults for Abbott Diagnostics, Fujirebio, Ortho Diagnostics, Quidell, Roche Diagnostics and Siemens Healthineers. Dr Mahler receives funding and support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, OrthoQuidel, Beckman Coulter, Genetesis, Cytovale, Health Resources and Services Administration (1H2ARH399760100) and AHRQ (R01HS029017). He is a consultant for Roche, Quidel, Abbott, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and is the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc.

Background: Emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians demonstrate a high prevalence of chronic medical conditions that place them at risk for early mortality. Workplace health promotion programs improve health outcomes, but the availably of such programs for EMS clinicians has not been described. We investigate the availability, scope, and participation of workplace health promotion programs available to EMS clinicians in North Carolina (NC)., Methods: We administered an electronic survey based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Worksite Health ScoreCard to key representatives of EMS agencies within NC that provide primarily transport-capable 9-1-1 response with ground ambulances. We collected information on agency size, rurality, elements of health promotion programs offered, incentives for participation, and participation rate. We calculated descriptive statistics using frequency and percentage for worksite and health promotion program characteristics. We compared the participation rate for agencies who did and did not incentivize participation using Fisher's exact test., Results: Complete responses were received from 69 of 92 agencies (response = 75%) that collectively employ 6679 EMS clinicians [median employees per agency 71 (IQR 50-131)]. Most agencies (88.4%, 61/69) offered at least one element of a worksite health program, but only 13.0% (9/69) offered all elements of a worksite health program. In descending order, the availability of program elements were employee assistance programs (73.9%, 51/69), supportive physical and social environment (66.7%, 46/69), health education (62.3%, 43/69), health risk assessments (52.2%, 36/69), and organization culture of health promotion (20.3%, 14/69). Of agencies with programs, few (11.5%, 7/61) required participation, but most (59.0%, 36/61) offered incentives to participate. Participation rates were <25% among nearly all of the agencies that did not offer incentives, but >50% among most agencies that did offer incentives ( p  < 0.001)., Conclusion: While most agencies offer at least one element of a worksite health promotion program, few agencies offer all elements and participation rates are low.

Objective: The History, Electrocardiogram (ECG), Age, and Risk factor (HEAR) and History and ECG-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (HE-MACS) risk scores can risk stratify chest pain patients without troponin measures. The objective of this study was to determine if either risk score could achieve the ≥99% negative predictive value (NPV) required to rule out major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization) at 30 days or the ≥50% positive predictive value (PPV) indicative of a patient possibly needing interventional cardiology., Methods: We performed a pre-planned secondary analysis of the prospective multisite PARAHEART ( n  = 462, 12/2016-1/2018) and RESCUE ( n  = 767, 4/2018-1/2019) trials, which accrued adults ≥21 years old with acute non-traumatic chest pain transported by emergency medical services (EMS). Paramedics prospectively completed risk assessment forms. Very low risk was defined by a HEAR score of 0-1 or HE-MACS probability <4%. The primary outcome was 30-day MACE, which was determined by adjudication (PARAHEART) or electronic record review (RESCUE). NPV and PPV with exact 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for 30-day MACE were calculated for each risk score and compared using McNemar's tests., Results: Among the PARAHEART and RESCUE cohorts, 30-day MACE occurred in 18.8% (87/462) and 6.9% (53/767) of patients, respectively. In PARAHEART, 7.8% (36/462) were very low risk by HEAR score vs. 7.8% (36/462) by HE-MACS ( p  = 1.0). The HEAR score had a NPV of 97.2% (95%CI 91.9-100.0) vs. 91.7% (95%CI 82.6-100.0) for HE-MACS ( p  = 0.15). The HEAR and HE-MACS PPVs were similar [46.4% (95%CI 28.0-64.9) vs. 33.3% (95%CI 13.2-53.5) ( p  = 0.26)]. In RESCUE, the HEAR score identified 14.2% (109/767) as low risk compared to 8.3% (64/767) by HE-MACS ( p  < 0.001). In this cohort, the HEAR and HE-MACS scores had similar NPVs [98.2% (95%CI 95.7-100.0) vs. 98.4% (95%CI 95.4-100.0) ( p  = 0.89)] and PPVs [16.2% (95%CI 6.2-32.0) vs. 22.6% (95%CI 12.3-36.2) ( p  = 0.41)]., Conclusions: In two prehospital chest pain cohorts, neither the HEAR score nor HE-MACS achieved sufficient NPV or PPV to rule out or rule in 30-day MACE.

Background: Hypercholesterolemia (HCL) affects nearly half of Emergency Department (ED) patients who present with possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, it is unknown whether US ED providers obtain lipid panels, calculate 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk, and prescribe cholesterol-lowering medications for these patients., Methods: We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional ED survey from April 18, 2023, to May 12, 2023. An electronic survey assessing current preventive HCL care practices for patients being evaluated for ACS. A convenience sample was obtained by sharing the survey with ED medical directors, chairs, and senior leaders using emergency medicine professional organization listservs and snowball sampling. Responding EDs were categorized as being associated with an academic medical center (AMC) or not (non-AMC)., Results: During the 4-week study period, 110 EDs (50 AMC and 60 non-AMC EDs) across 39 states responded. Just 1.8% (2/110) stated that their providers obtain a lipid panel on at least half of patients with possible ACS and only one ED (0.9%) responded that its providers calculate 10-year ASCVD risk and prescribe cholesterol medication for the majority of eligible patients. Most reported never obtaining lipid panels (60.9%, 67/110), calculating 10-year ASCVD risk (55.5%, 61/110), or prescribing cholesterol-lowering medications (52.7%, 58/110)., Conclusions: The vast majority of US ED providers do not provide preventive cardiovascular care for patients presenting with possible ACS. Most ED providers do not evaluate for HCL, calculate ASCVD risk, or prescribe cholesterol-lowering medications for these patients., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Atellica® VTLi point-of-care (POC) High Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin-I (hs-cTnI) assay is intended for use as an aid in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI). Our primary objective is to assess its diagnostic performance in patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods: This prospective observational study will enrol ∼1500 patients at ∼20 U.S. Emergency Departments. After informed consent, adults (>21 years of age) with suspected ACS, and no prior enrollment in this study, will provide a fingerstick and venous blood sample within 2 h of ED presentation, >2 to ≤4 h, and >4 to ≤9 h (max. blood draw = 60 mL). HEART and EDACS scores will be prospectively documented. Patients without the first blood draw may be enrolled if the second draw was obtained. Capillary and venous whole blood will undergo Atellica VTLi assay testing, with remaining venous sample processed to plasma and run. All results will be blinded to the clinical care team. Site operators will undergo a 3-day familiarization period. Quality control testing will be performed daily. At 30 ± 3 days, patient mortality status, major adverse cardiac events, and rehospitalizations will be determined. A clinical endpoint adjudication committee, blinded to hs-cTnI VTLi result, will define the final diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values will describe the assay performance., Results: We expect study completion within 114 weeks of enrollment of the first patient., Conclusions: It is anticipated that the Atellica VTLi hs-cTnI assay validation study will define a performance equivalent to lab-based hs-cTnI, with results within ∼8 min at the point of care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This study was sponsored by Siemen's Healthineers. Each of the non-Siemen's employee author's institutions received financial support to enroll patients in this trial., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guidelines recommend an emergency medical services (EMS) first medical contact (FMC) to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) time of ≤90 min. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the association between FMC to PCI time and mortality in rural STEMI patients., Methods: We conducted a cohort study of patients ≥18 years old with STEMI activations from January 2016 to March 2020. Data were obtained from a rural North Carolina Regional STEMI Data Registry, which included eight rural EMS agencies and three PCI centers, the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, and the EMS electronic health record. Prehospital and in-hospital time intervals were digitally abstracted. The outcome of index hospitalization mortality was compared between patients who did and did not meet FMC to PCI time goal using Fisher's exact tests. Negative predictive value (NPV) for index hospitalization death was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed and an optimal FMC to PCI time goal was identified by maximizing NPV to prevent index hospitalization death., Results: Among 365 rural EMS STEMI patients, 30.1% (110/365) were female with a mean ± SD age of 62.5 ± 12.7 years. PCI was performed within the 90-min time goal in 60.5% (221/365) of patients. Among these patients, 3% (11/365) died during initial STEMI hospitalization, with 1.4% (3/221) mortality in the group that met the 90-minute time goal compared to 5.6% (8/144) in patients exceeding the time goal (p = 0.03). Meeting the 90-min time goal yielded a 98.6% (95% CI 96.1%-99.7%) NPV for index death. A 78-min FMC to PCI time was the optimal cut point, yielding a NPV for index mortality of 99.3% (95% CI 96.1%-100%)., Conclusions: Death among rural patients with STEMI was four times more likely when they did not receive PCI within 90 min., (© 2023 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

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., (© 2023 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: In suspected myocardial infarction (MI), guidelines recommend using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn)-based approaches. These require fixed assay-specific thresholds and timepoints, without directly integrating clinical information. Using machine-learning techniques including hs-cTn and clinical routine variables, we aimed to build a digital tool to directly estimate the individual probability of MI, allowing for numerous hs-cTn assays., Methods: In 2,575 patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected MI, two ensembles of machine-learning models using single or serial concentrations of six different hs-cTn assays were derived to estimate the individual MI probability (ARTEMIS model). Discriminative performance of the models was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and logLoss. Model performance was validated in an external cohort with 1688 patients and tested for global generalizability in 13 international cohorts with 23,411 patients., Results: Eleven routinely available variables including age, sex, cardiovascular risk factors, electrocardiography, and hs-cTn were included in the ARTEMIS models. In the validation and generalization cohorts, excellent discriminative performance was confirmed, superior to hs-cTn only. For the serial hs-cTn measurement model, AUC ranged from 0.92 to 0.98. Good calibration was observed. Using a single hs-cTn measurement, the ARTEMIS model allowed direct rule-out of MI with very high and similar safety but up to tripled efficiency compared to the guideline-recommended strategy., Conclusion: We developed and validated diagnostic models to accurately estimate the individual probability of MI, which allow for variable hs-cTn use and flexible timing of resampling. Their digital application may provide rapid, safe and efficient personalized patient care., Trial Registration Numbers: Data of following cohorts were used for this project: BACC ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT02355457), stenoCardia ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT03227159), ADAPT-BSN ( www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au ; ACTRN12611001069943), IMPACT ( www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au , ACTRN12611000206921), ADAPT-RCT ( www.anzctr.org.au ; ANZCTR12610000766011), EDACS-RCT ( www.anzctr.org.au ; ANZCTR12613000745741); DROP-ACS ( https://www.umin.ac.jp , UMIN000030668); High-STEACS ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT01852123), LUND ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT05484544), RAPID-CPU ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT03111862), ROMI ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT01994577), SAMIE ( https://anzctr.org.au ; ACTRN12621000053820), SEIGE and SAFETY ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT04772157), STOP-CP ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT02984436), UTROPIA ( www., Clinicaltrials: gov ; NCT02060760)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Hypercholesterolemia (HCL) is common among Emergency Department (ED) patients with chest pain but is typically not addressed in this setting. This study aims to determine whether a missed opportunity for Emergency Department Observation Unit (EDOU) HCL testing and treatment exists., Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients ≥18 years old evaluated for chest pain in an EDOU from 3/1/2019-2/28/2020. The electronic health record was used to determine demographics and if HCL testing or treatment occurred. HCL was defined by self-report or clinician diagnosis. Proportions of patients receiving HCL testing or treatment at 1-year following their ED visit were calculated. HCL testing and treatment rates at 1-year were compared between white vs. non-white and male vs. female patients using multivariable logistic regression models including age, sex, and race., Results: Among 649 EDOU patients with chest pain, 55.8% (362/649) had known HCL. Among patients without known HCL, 5.9% (17/287, 95% CI 3.5-9.3%) had a lipid panel during their index ED/EDOU visit and 26.5% (76/287, 95% CI 21.5-32.0%) had a lipid panel within 1-year of their initial ED/EDOU visit. Among patients with known or newly diagnosed HCL, 54.0% (229/424, 95% CI 49.1-58.8%) were on treatment within 1-year. After adjustment, testing rates were similar among white vs. non-white patients (aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.37-1.38) and men vs. women (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 0.69-2.57). Treatment rates were similar among white vs. non-white (aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53-1.03) and male vs. female (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.77-1.51) patients., Conclusions: Few patients were evaluated for HCL in the ED/EDOU or outpatient setting after their ED/EDOU encounter and only 54% of patients with HCL were on treatment during the 1-year follow-up period after the index ED/EDOU visit. These findings suggest a missed opportunity to reduce cardiovascular disease risk exists by evaluating and treating HCL in the ED or EDOU., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Ashburn receives funding from NHLBI (T32HL076132). Dr. Snavely receives funding from Abbott and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). Dr. Rikhi receives funding from NHLBI (T32HL076132). Dr. Shapiro has participated in scientific advisory boards with Amgen, Novartis, Ionis, Precision BioSciences and has served as a consultant for Regeneron, Ionis, Novartis, and EmendoBio. Dr. Stopyra receives research funding from NCATS/NIH (KL2TR001421), HRSA (H2ARH39976–01-00), Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Forest Devices, Vifor Pharma, and Chiesi Farmaceutici. Dr. Mahler receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, QuidelOrtho, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). He is a consultant for Roche, Abbott, Beckman Coulter, Siemens, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and is the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. The other authors report no conflicts., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hypercholesterolemia (HCL) is common among emergency department (ED) and ED observation unit (EDOU) patients with chest pain but is not typically addressed in these settings. The objective of this study was to assess patient attitudes towards EDOU-based HCL care using the Health Belief Model., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study among 100 EDOU patients ≥18 years-old evaluated for chest pain in the EDOU of a tertiary care center from September 1, 2020, to November 01, 2021. Five-point Likert-scale surveys were used to assess each Health Belief Model domain: Cues to Action, Perceived Susceptibility, Perceived Barriers, Perceived Self-Efficacy, and Perceived Benefits. Responses were categorized as agree or do not agree., Results: The participants were 49.0% (49/100) female, 39.0% (39/100) non-white, and had a mean age of 59.0 ± 12.4 years. Most (83.0% [83/100, 95% confidence interval (CI), 74.2%-89.8%]) agreed the EDOU is an appropriate place for HCL education and 52.0% (52/100, 95% CI, 41.8%-62.1%) were interested in talking with their EDOU care team about HCL. Regarding Perceived Susceptibility, 88.0% (88/100, 95% CI, 80.0%-93.6%) believed HCL to be bad for their health, while 41.0% (41/100, 95% CI, 31.3%-51.3%) believed medication costs could be a barrier. For Perceived Self-Efficacy, 76.0% (76/100, 95% CI, 66.4%-84.0%) were receptive to taking medications. Overall, 95.0% (95/100, 95% CI, 88.7%-98.4%) believed managing HCL would benefit their health., Conclusions: This Health Belief Model-based survey indicates high patient interest in EDOU-initiated HCL care. Patients reported high rates of Perceived Susceptibility, Self-Efficacy, and Benefits and a minority found HCL therapy costs a barrier., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Emergency Department Observation Unit (EDOU) patients with chest pain have a high prevalence of smoking, a key cardiovascular disease risk factor. While in the EDOU, there is an opportunity to initiate smoking cessation therapy (SCT), but this is not standard practice. This study aims to describe the missed opportunity for EDOU-initiated SCT by determining the proportion of smokers who receive SCT in the EDOU and within 1-year of EDOU discharge and to evaluate if SCT rates vary by race or sex., Methods: We performed an observational cohort study of patients ≥18 years old being evaluated for chest pain in a tertiary care center EDOU from 3/1/2019-2/28/2020. Demographics, smoking history, and SCT were determined by electronic health record review. Emergency, family medicine, internal medicine, and cardiology records were reviewed to determine if SCT occurred within 1-year of their initial visit. SCT was defined as behavioral interventions or pharmacotherapy. Rates of SCT in the EDOU, 1-year follow-up period, and the EDOU through 1-year of follow-up were calculated. SCT rates from the EDOU through 1-year were compared between white vs. non-white and male vs. female patients using a multivariable logistic regression model including age, sex, and race., Results: Among 649 EDOU patients, 24.0% (156/649) were smokers. These patients were 51.3% (80/156) female and 46.8% (73/156) white, with a mean age of 54.4 ± 10.5 years. From the EDOU encounter through 1-year of follow-up, only 33.3% (52/156) received SCT. In the EDOU, 16.0% (25/156) received SCT. During the 1-year follow-up period, 22.4% (35/156) had outpatient SCT. After adjusting for potential confounders, SCT rates from the EDOU through 1-year were similar among whites vs. non-whites (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 0.61-2.32) and males vs. females (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.40-1.56)., Conclusions: SCT was rarely initiated in the EDOU among chest pain patients who smoke and most patients who did not receive SCT in the EDOU never received SCT at 1-year of follow-up. Rates of SCT were similarly low among race and sex subgroups. These data suggest an opportunity exists to improve health by initiating SCT in the EDOU., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr. Ashburn receives funding from NHLBI (T32HL076132). Dr. Snavely receives funding from Abbott and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). Dr. Rikhi receives funding from NHLBI (T32HL076132). Dr. Stopyra receives research funding from NCATS/NIH (KL2TR001421), HRSA (H2ARH39976-01-00), Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, Forest Devices, Vifor Pharma, and Chiesi Farmaceutici. Dr. Mahler receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Quidel, Genetesis, Cytovale, and HRSA (1H2ARH399760100). He is a consultant for Roche, Quidel, Abbott, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and is the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. The other authors report no conflicts., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal diagnostic strategy for patients with chest pain and detectable to mildly elevated serum troponin is not known. The objective was to compare clinical outcomes among an early decision for a noninvasive versus an invasive-based care pathway., Methods: The CMR-IMPACT trial (Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Strategy for the Management of Patients with Acute Chest Pain and Detectable to Elevated Troponin) was conducted at 4 United States tertiary care hospitals from September 2013 to July 2018. A convenience sample of 312 participants with acute chest pain symptoms and a contemporary troponin between detectable and 1.0 ng/mL were randomized early in their care to 1 of 2 care pathways: invasive-based (n=156) or cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-based (n=156) with modification allowed as the patient condition evolved. The primary outcome was a composite including death, myocardial infarction, and cardiac-related hospital readmission or emergency visits., Results: Participants (N=312, mean age, 60.6 years, SD 11.3; 125 women [59.9%]), were followed over a median of 2.6 years (95% CI, 2.4-2.9). Early assigned testing was initiated in 102 out of 156 (65.3%) CMR-based and 110 out of 156 (70.5%) invasive-based participants. The primary outcome (CMR-based versus invasive-based) occurred in 59% versus 52% (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.86-1.57]), acute coronary syndrome after discharge 23% versus 22% (hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.67-1.71]), and invasive angiography at any time 52% versus 74% (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.49-0.87]). Among patients completing CMR imaging, 55 out of 95 (58%) were safely identified for discharge based on a negative CMR and did not have angiography or revascularization within 90 days. Therapeutic yield of angiography was higher in the CMR-based arm (52 interventions in 81 angiographies [64.2%] versus 46 interventions in 115 angiographies [40.0%] in the invasive-based arm [ P =0.001])., Conclusions: Initial management with CMR or invasive-based care pathways resulted in no detectable difference in clinical and safety event rates. The CMR-based pathway facilitated safe discharge, enriched the therapeutic yield of angiography, and reduced invasive angiography utilization over long-term follow-up., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01931852., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Miller received research funding from Abbott, Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International (COVID-related), and Gifols Therapeutics (COVID-related). Dr Mahler receives funding/support from Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, QuidelOrtho, Siemens, Grifols, Pathfast, Genetesis, Cytovale, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI; 1 R01 HL118263-01), and Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA; 1H2ARH399760100). He is a consultant for Roche, Quidel, Abbott, Genetesis, Inflammatix, Radiometer, and Amgen and the Chief Medical Officer for Impathiq Inc. Dr Stopyra receives research funding from National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)/National Institutes of Health (NIH) (KL2TR001421), HRSA (H2ARH39976-01-00), NHLBI (U01HL123027), Roche Diagnostics, and Abbott Point of Care. He has provided paid consulting to Roche Diagnostics. Dr Hiestand receives research funding from Siemens. Dr Caterino receives research funding from National Institute on Aging (NIA)/NIH. Dr Snavely receives research funding from Abbott Laboratories, NHLBI (1 R01 HL118263-01), and HRSA (1 H2ARH399760100).

Importance: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-hour algorithm is a validated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) protocol for emergency department patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. However, limited data exist regarding its performance in patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD; prior myocardial infarction [MI], coronary revascularization, or ≥70% coronary stenosis)., Objective: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of the ESC 0/1-hour algorithm for 30-day cardiac death or MI among patients with and without known CAD and determine if the algorithm could achieve the negative predictive value rule-out threshold of 99% or higher., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a preplanned subgroup analysis of the STOP-CP prospective multisite cohort study, which was conducted from January 25, 2017, through September 6, 2018, at 8 emergency departments in the US. Patients 21 years or older with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation on initial electrocardiogram were included. Analysis took place between February and December 2022., Interventions/exposures: Participants with 0- and 1-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) measures were stratified into rule-out, observation, and rule-in zones using the ESC 0/1-hour hs-cTnT algorithm., Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiac death or MI at 30 days determined by expert adjudicators., Results: During the study period, 1430 patients were accrued. In the cohort, 775 individuals (54.2%) were male, 826 (57.8%) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 57.6 (12.8) years. At 30 days, cardiac death or MI occurred in 183 participants (12.8%). Known CAD was present in 449 (31.4%). Among patients with known CAD, the ESC 0/1-hour algorithm classified 178 of 449 (39.6%) into the rule-out zone compared with 648 of 981 (66.1%) without CAD (P < .001). Among rule-out zone patients, 30-day cardiac death or MI occurred in 6 of 178 patients (3.4%) with known CAD and 7 of 648 (1.1%) without CAD (P < .001). The negative predictive value for 30-day cardiac death or MI was 96.6% (95% CI, 92.8-98.8) among patients with known CAD and 98.9% (95% CI, 97.8-99.6) in patients without known CAD (P = .04)., Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with known CAD, the ESC 0/1-hour hs-cTnT algorithm was unable to safely exclude 30-day cardiac death or MI. This suggests that clinicians should be cautious if using the algorithm in patients with known CAD. The negative predictive value was significantly higher in patients without a history of CAD but remained less than 99%.

Background: The HEART Pathway is widely used for chest pain risk stratification but has yet to be optimized for high sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) assays., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of STOP-CP, a prospective cohort study enrolling adult ED patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome at 8 sites in the United States (US). Patients had a 0- and 1-hour hs-cTnT measured and a HEAR score completed. A derivation set consisting of 729 randomly selected participants was used to derive a hs-cTnT HEART Pathway with rule-out, observation, and rule-in groups for 30-day cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI). Optimal baseline and 1-hour troponin cutoffs were selected using generalized cross validation to achieve a negative predictive value (NPV) >99% for rule out and positive predictive value (PPV) >60% or maximum Youden index for rule-in. Optimal 0-1-hour delta values were derived using generalized cross validation to maximize the NPV for the rule-out group and PPV for the rule-in group. The hs-cTnT HEART Pathway performance was validated in the remaining cohort (n = 723)., Results: Among the 1452 patients, 30-day cardiac death or MI occurred in 12.7% (184/1452). Within the derivation cohort the optimal hs-cTnT HEART Pathway classified 36.5% (266/729) into the rule-out group, yielding a NPV of 99.2% (95% CI: 98.2-100) for 30-day cardiac death or MI. The rule-in group included 15.4% (112/729) with a PPV of 55.4% (95% CI: 46.2-64.6). In the validation cohort, the hs-cTnT HEART Pathway ruled-out 37.6% (272/723), of which 2 had 30-day cardiac death or MI, yielding a NPV of 99.3% (95% CI: 98.3-100). The rule-in group included 14.5% (105/723), yielding a PPV of 57.1% (95% CI: 47.7-66.6)., Conclusions: A novel hs-cTnT HEART Pathway with serial 0- and 1-hour hs-cTnT measures has high NPV and moderate PPV for 30-day cardiac death or MI., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The HEART Pathway is a validated accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADP) for patients with possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of the HEART Pathway based on patient rurality (rural vs. urban) or socioeconomic status (SES)., Methods: We performed a preplanned subgroup analysis of the HEART Pathway Implementation Study. The primary outcomes were death or myocardial infarction (MI) and hospitalization at 30 days. Proportions were compared by SES and rurality with Fisher's exact tests. Logistic regression evaluated for interactions of ADP implementation with SES or rurality and changes in outcomes within subgroups., Results: Among 7245 patients with rurality and SES data, 39.9% (2887/7245) were rural and 22.2% were low SES (1607/7245). The HEART Pathway identified patients as low risk in 32.2% (818/2540) of urban versus 28.1% (425/1512) of rural patients (p = 0.007) and 34.0% (311/915) of low SES versus 29.7% (932/3137) high SES patients (p = 0.02). Among low-risk patients, 30-day death or MI occurred in 0.6% (5/818) of urban versus 0.2% (1/425) rural (p = 0.67) and 0.6% (2/311) with low SES versus 0.4% (4/932) high SES (p = 0.64). Following implementation, 30-day hospitalization was reduced by 7.7% in urban patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.87), 10.6% in low SES patients (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.86), and 4.5% in high SES patients (aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.94). However, rural patients had a nonsignificant 3.3% reduction in hospitalizations., Conclusions: HEART Pathway implementation decreased 30-day hospitalizations regardless of SES and for urban patients but not rural patients. The 30-day death or MI rate was similar among low-risk patients., (© 2022 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Metabolic syndrome is a constellation of risk factors associated with the development of cardiovascular disease and increased all-cause mortality. Data examining the prevalence of metabolic syndrome among emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians are limited., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of EMS clinicians and firefighters from three fire departments with transport-capable EMS divisions. Data were collected from compulsory annual physical exams for 2021 that included age, sex, race, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and hemoglobin A1c level. These data were used to determine the prevalence of meeting metabolic syndrome criteria. We calculated descriptive statistics of demographics, anthropometrics, and metabolic syndrome criteria for EMS clinicians and firefighters. We used chi-square tests to compare the proportion of EMS clinicians and firefighters meeting criteria for the whole group and among age groups of <40 years old, 40 to 59 years old, and ≥60 years old. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds of meeting criteria in EMS clinicians compared to firefighters, adjusted for age, sex, race, and BMI., Results: We reviewed data for 65 EMS clinicians and 239 firefighters. For the combined cohort, 13.2% (40/304) were female and 95.1% (289/304) were White. The median age for EMS clinicians was 34 years versus 45 years in firefighters (p < 0.0001). Metabolic syndrome criteria were met in 27.3% (83/304) of the entire group. The prevalence of meeting criteria among EMS clinicians and firefighters was 33.9% (22/65) and 25.5% (61/239), respectively (p = 0.18). Of the participants who were younger than age 40, 36.6% (15/41) of EMS clinicians versus 9.1% (7/74) of firefighters met criteria for metabolic syndrome (p < 0.001). EMS clinicians had significantly higher odds of meeting criteria [OR 4.62 (p = 0.001)] compared to firefighters when adjusted for age, sex, race, and BMI., Conclusion: EMS clinicians had a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome at an early age, and had a higher adjusted odds of having metabolic syndrome compared to firefighters.

Background: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusion: 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.

Background: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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)., Conclusion: 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.

Background: Emergency medical services (EMS) assesses millions of patients with chest pain each year. However, tools validated to risk stratify patients for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and pulmonary embolism (PE) have not been translated to the prehospital setting. The objective of this study is to assess the prehospital performance of risk stratification scores for 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and PE., Methods: A prospective observational cohort study of patients ≥21 years of age with acute chest pain who were transported by EMS in two North Carolina (NC) counties was conducted from 18 April 2018-2 January 2019. In this convenience sample, paramedics completed HEAR (history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factor), ED Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS), Revised Geneva Score (RGS), and pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) assessments on each patient. MACE (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization) and PE at 30 days were determined by hospital records and NC Death Index. The positive (+LR) and negative likelihood ratios (-LR) of the risk scores for 30-day MACE and PE were calculated., Results: During the study period, 82.1% (687/837) patients had all four risk score assessments. The cohort was 51.1% (351/687) female, 49.5% (340/687) African American, and had a mean age of 55.0 years (SD 16.0). At 30 days, MACE occurred in 7.4% (51/687), PE occurred in 0.9% (6/687), and the combined outcome occurred in 8.2% (56/687). The HEAR score had a - LR of 0.46 (95% CI 0.27-0.78) and + LR of 1.48 (95% CI 1.26-1.74) for 30-day MACE. EDACS had a - LR of 0.61 (95% CI 0.46-0.81) and + LR of 2.53 (95% CI 1.86-3.46) for 30-day MACE. The PERC score had a - LR of 0 (95% CI 0.0-1.4) and a + LR of 1.38 (95% CI 1.32-1.45) for 30-day PE. The RGS score had a - LR of 0 (95% CI 0.0-0.65) and a + LR of 2.36 (95% CI 2.16-2.57) for 30-day PE. The combination of a low-risk HEAR score and negative PERC evaluation had a - LR of 0.25 (95% CI 0.08-0.76) and a + LR of 1.21 (95% CI 1.21-1.30) for 30-day MACE or PE., Conclusion: The combination of a paramedic-obtained HEAR score and PERC evaluation performed best to exclude 30-day MACE and PE but was not sufficient for directing prehospital decision making.

The 2021 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/American Society of Echocardiography/American College of Chest Physicians/Society for Academic Emergency Medicine/Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography/Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance guidelines for the evaluation and diagnosis of acute chest pain make important recommendations that include the recognition of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) as the preferred biomarker, endorsement of 99th percentile upper reference limits to define myocardial injury, and the use of clinical decision pathways, as well as acknowledgment of the uniqueness of women and other patient subsets. Details on how to integrate hs-cTn into clinical practice are less extensively addressed. Clinicians should be aware of some of the analytical aspects related to hs-cTn assays regarding the limit of detection and the limit of quantitation and how they are used clinically, especially for the single sample strategy to rule out acute myocardial infarction. Likewise, it is important for clinicians to understand issues related to the derivation of the 99th percentile upper reference limit; the value of sex-specific 99th percentile upper reference limits; how to use changing concentrations (deltas) to facilitate diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome, including the differentiation of acute from chronic myocardial injury; and how to best integrate the use of hs-cTn with clinical decision pathways. With the use of hs-cTn, conditions such as type 2 myocardial infarction become more common, whereas others such as unstable angina become less frequent but still occur. Sections relating to these issues are included.

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., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Despite negative troponins and nonischemic electrocardiograms (ECGs), patients at moderate risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are frequently admitted. The objective of this study was to describe the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate in moderate-risk patients and how it differs based on history of coronary artery disease (CAD)., Methods: A secondary analysis of the HEART Pathway implementation study was conducted. This prospective interrupted time-series study accrued adults with possible ACS from three sites (November 2013-January 2016). This analysis excluded low-risk patients determined by emergency providers' HEART Pathway assessments. Non-low-risk patients were further classified as high risk, based on elevated troponin measures or ischemic ECG findings or as moderate risk, based on HEAR score ≥ 4, negative troponin measures, and a nonischemic ECG. Moderate-risk patients were then stratified by the presence or absence of prior CAD (MI, revascularization, or ≥70% coronary stenosis). MACE (death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization) at 30 days was determined from health records, insurance claims, and death index data. MACE rates were compared among groups using a chi-square test and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated., Results: Among 4,550 patients with HEART Pathway assessments, 24.8% (1,130/4,550) were high risk and 37.7% (1715/4550) were moderate risk. MACE at 30 days occurred in 3.1% (53/1,715; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.3% to 4.0%) of moderate-risk patients. Among moderate-risk patients, MACE occurred in 7.1% (36/508, 95% CI = 5.1% to 9.8%) of patients with known CAD versus 1.4% (17/1,207, 95% CI = 0.9% to 2.3%) in patients without known prior CAD (p < 0.0001). The negative LR for 30-day MACE among moderate-risk patients without prior CAD was 0.08 (95% CI = 0.05 to 0.12)., Conclusion: MACE rates at 30 days were low among moderate-risk patients but were significantly higher among those with prior CAD., (© 2022 The Authors. Academic Emergency Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Data evaluating the impact of the history, ECG, age, risk factors, and troponin (HEART) Pathway on observation unit (OU) use is limited. The objective of this study is to determine how HEART Pathway implementation affects OU use., Methods: An analysis of OU registry data from October 2012 to October 2016, 2 years before and after HEART Pathway implementation at an academic medical center, was conducted. Adult patients placed in the OU for chest pain were included. The proportion of patients placed in the OU chest pain protocol per total OU volume and hospitalization and myocardial infarction (MI) rates were determined. Proportions before versus after implementation were compared using χ2 tests and age was compared using a Mann-Whitney U test., Results: During the study period, 1688 patients with chest pain before HEART Pathway implementation and 1692 after were included. The proportion of chest pain patients in the OU per total OU volume decreased following implementation from (57% [1688/2968] to 43.6% [1692/3882]; P < 0.001). Before HEART Pathway implementation, the hospitalization rate was 10.4% (175/1688) versus 12.4% (210/1692) after (P = 0.07). More patients were diagnosed with MI following implementation (0.8% [14/1665] vs. 2.0% [33/1686]; P = 0. 008). Median age was older postimplementation (52 years [IQR: 45-59 years] vs. 54 years [IQR: 48-64 years]; P < 0. 001)., Conclusions: HEART Pathway implementation resulted in management of higher risk patients in the OU. Following implementation, OU chest pain patients were older and were more likely to be hospitalized or diagnosed with MI., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, 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: Chest pain is a common reason for ambulance transport. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and pulmonary embolism (PE) risk assessments, such as history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors (HEAR); Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS); Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC); and revised Geneva score, are well validated for emergency department (ED) use but have not been translated to the prehospital setting. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the 1) prehospital completion rate and 2) inter-rater reliability of chest pain risk assessments., Methods: We conducted a prospective observational cohort study in two emergency medical services (EMS) agencies (April 18, 2018 - January 2, 2019). Adults with acute, non-traumatic chest pain without ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable vital signs were accrued. Paramedics were trained to use the HEAR, EDACS, PERC, and revised Geneva score assessments. A subset of patients (a priori goal of N = 250) also had the four risk assessments completed by their treating clinicians in the ED, who were blinded to the EMS risk assessments. Outcomes were 1) risk assessments completion rate and 2) inter-rater reliability between EMS and ED assessments. An a priori goal for completion rate was set as >75%. We computed kappa with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each risk assessment as a measure of inter-rater reliability. Acceptable agreement was defined a priori as kappa ≥ 0.60., Results: During the study period, 837 patients with acute chest pain were accrued. The median age was 54 years, interquartile range 43-66, with 53% female and 51% Black. Completion rates for each risk assessment were above goal: the HEAR score was completed on 95.1% (796/837), EDACS on 92.0% (770/837), PERC on 89.4% (748/837), and revised Geneva score on 90.7% (759/837) of patients. We assessed agreement in a subgroup of 260 patients. The HEAR score had a kappa of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.41-0.61); EDACS was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.49-0.72); PERC was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.61-0.81); and revised Geneva score was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.39-0.62)., Conclusion: The completion rate of risk assessments for ACS and PE was high for prehospital field personnel. The PERC and EDACS both demonstrated acceptable agreement between paramedics and clinicians in the ED, although assessments with better agreement are likely needed.

Background: The BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc.) is a lateral flow immunochromatographic point-of-care test for the qualitative detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein antigen. It provides results from nasal swabs in 15 minutes. Our purpose was to determine its sensitivity and specificity for a COVID-19 diagnosis., Methods: Eligible patients had symptoms of COVID-19 or suspected exposure. After consent, 2 nasal swabs were collected; 1 was tested using the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 (ie, the gold standard polymerase chain reaction test) and the second run on the BinaxNOW point of care platform by emergency department staff., Results: From July 20 to October 28, 2020, 767 patients were enrolled, of which 735 had evaluable samples. Their mean (SD) age was 46.8 (16.6) years, and 422 (57.4%) were women. A total of 623 (84.8%) patients had COVID-19 symptoms, most commonly shortness of breath ( n  = 404; 55.0%), cough ( n  = 314; 42.7%), and fever ( n  = 253; 34.4%). Although 460 (62.6%) had symptoms ≤7 days, the mean (SD) time since symptom onset was 8.1 (14.0) days. Positive tests occurred in 173 (23.5%) and 141 (19.2%) with the gold standard versus BinaxNOW test, respectively. Those with symptoms >2 weeks had a positive test rate roughly half of those with earlier presentations. In patients with symptoms ≤7 days, the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values for the BinaxNOW test were 84.6%, 98.5%, 94.9%, and 95.2%, respectively., Conclusions: The BinaxNOW point-of-care test has good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of COVID-19. We recommend using the BinasNOW for patients with symptoms up to 2 weeks., Competing Interests: Each author's institution received financial support for the performance of the study., (© 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Acute chest pain is a common emergency department (ED) chief complaint. Evaluating patients for acute coronary syndrome is challenging because missing the diagnosis carries substantial morbidity, mortality, and medicolegal consequences. However, over-testing is associated with increased cost, overcrowding, and possible iatrogenic harm. Over the past two decades, multiple risk scoring systems have been developed to help emergency providers evaluate patients with acute chest pain. The ideal risk score balances safety by achieving high sensitivity and negative predictive value for major adverse cardiovascular events while also being effective in identifying a large proportion of patients for early discharge from the ED. This review examines contemporary risk scores used to risk stratify patients with acute chest pain., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.)