Kim Askew

The HEART Pathway Randomized Trial Identifying Emergency Department Patients With Acute Chest Pain for Early Discharge

Background—The HEART Pathway is a decision aid designed to identify emergency department patients with acute chest pain for early discharge. No randomized trials have compared the HEART Pathway with usual care. Methods and Results—Adult emergency department patients with symptoms related to acute coronary syndrome without ST-elevation on ECG (n=282) were randomized to the HEART Pathway or usual care. In the HEART Pathway arm, emergency department providers used the HEART score, a validated decision aid, and troponin measures at 0 and 3 hours to identify patients for early discharge. Usual care was based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. The primary outcome, objective cardiac testing (stress testing or angiography), and secondary outcomes, index length of stay, early discharge, and major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization), were assessed at 30 days by phone interview and record review. Participants had a mean age of 53 years, 16% had previous myocardial infarction, and 6% (95% confidence interval, 3.6%–9.5%) had major adverse cardiac events within 30 days of randomization. Compared with usual care, use of the HEART Pathway decreased objective cardiac testing at 30 days by 12.1% (68.8% versus 56.7%; P=0.048) and length of stay by 12 hours (9.9 versus 21.9 hours; P=0.013) and increased early discharges by 21.3% (39.7% versus 18.4%; P<0.001). No patients identified for early discharge had major adverse cardiac events within 30 days. Conclusions—The HEART Pathway reduces objective cardiac testing during 30 days, shortens length of stay, and increases early discharges. These important efficiency gains occurred without any patients identified for early discharge suffering MACE at 30 days. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT01665521.

Implications of 25% to 50% coronary stenosis with cardiac computed tomographic angiography in ED patients

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine if patients presenting with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome and found to have 25% to 50% diameter reduction with coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) are likely to benefit from further diagnostic testing. METHODS A registry study of 213 subjects (median age, 51 years; 53% women) with symptoms concerning for possible acute coronary syndrome with low-risk features found to have 25% to 50% maximal diameter stenosis on CCTA was performed at 2 academic medical centers. The analysis was approved by an institutional review board and was conducted with waiver of consent. The potential contribution of additional testing was determined by measuring the major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) from presentation through 30 days. The MACEs included myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, unstable angina, and cardiovascular death. Sample size calculations were predicated on a 0% MACE rate leading to upper bounds of a 2-sided exact 95% confidence interval less than 2%. RESULTS Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score of less than 2 was present in 92% subjects, 70% (150 of 213) had 2 or more serial cardiac markers performed, and 40% (87 of 213) had stress testing or cardiac catheterization. The MACEs occurred in 1 (0.5%) of 213 subjects (95% confidence interval, 0%-2.6%) and was identified by an elevation of serial cardiac markers during the index hospitalization. No patients experienced cardiovascular death or required revascularization. CONCLUSIONS In patients with emergent low-risk chest pain and 25% to 50% diameter coronary stenosis by CCTA, the rate of near-term MACE is very low. Serial cardiac markers may be beneficial in this subgroup. Routine provocative testing is unlikely to be beneficial during the index visit.

Delphi Method Validation of a Procedural Performance Checklist for Insertion of an Ultrasound-Guided Internal Jugular Central Line.

Placement of ultrasound-guided central lines is a critical skill for physicians in several specialties. Improving the quality of care delivered surrounding this procedure demands rigorous measurement of competency, and validated tools to assess performance are essential. Using the iterative, modified Delphi technique and experts in multiple disciplines across the United States, the study team created a 30-item checklist designed to assess competency in the placement of ultrasound-guided internal jugular central lines. Cronbach α was .94, indicating an excellent degree of internal consistency. Further validation of this checklist will require its implementation in simulated and clinical environments.

Performance of the EDACS-accelerated Diagnostic Pathway in a Cohort of US Patients with Acute Chest Pain.

BACKGROUND The Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) is a decision aid designed to safely identify emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain for early discharge. Derivation and validation studies in Australasia have demonstrated high sensitivity (99%-100%) for major adverse cardiac events (MACE). OBJECTIVES To validate the EDACS-ADP in a cohort of US ED patients with symptoms suspicious for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS A secondary analysis of participants enrolled in the HEART Pathway Randomized Controlled Trial was conducted. This single-site trial enrolled 282 ED patients≥21 years old with symptoms concerning for ACS, inclusive of all cardiac risk levels. Each patient was classified as low risk or at risk by the EDACS-ADP based on EDACS, electrocardiogram, and serial troponins. Potential early discharge rate and sensitivity for MACE at 30 days, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or coronary revascularization were calculated. RESULTS MACE occurred in 17/282 (6.0%) participants, including no deaths, 16/282 (5.6%) with MI, and 1/282 (0.4%) with coronary revascularization without MI. The EDACS-ADP identified 188/282 patients [66.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 60.8%-72.1%] as low risk. Of these, 2/188 (1.1%, 95% CI: 0.1%-3.9%) had MACE at 30 days. EDACS-ADP was 88.2% (95% CI: 63.6%-98.5%) sensitive for MACE, identifying 15/17 patients. Of the 2 patients identified as low risk with MACE, 1 had MI and 1 had coronary revascularization without MI. CONCLUSIONS Within a US cohort of ED patients with symptoms concerning for ACS, sensitivity for MACE was 88.2%. We are unable to validate the EDACS-ADP as sufficiently sensitive for clinical use.

Clinical reasoning: are we testing what we are teaching?

The prediction of responses to feedback is confounded by many influences. Feedback is more than simply a message given to a learner. The process of feedback, much more importantly, refers to ensuring that the message is received, to how it is interpreted, and to how it may need to be contextualised for and acted upon by the individual. Even if the feedback is appropriate, accurate and delivered in a manner tailored to the individual learner, it may not come at a time that is right for the learner to be receptive to the message and its implications. Watling et al. raise educators’ awareness of how considering learners’ self-regulatory focus will enhance the ‘feedback conversation’.

Cost analysis of the History, ECG, Age, Risk factors, and initial Troponin (HEART) Pathway randomized control trial

Introduction: The HEART Pathway is a diagnostic protocol designed to identify low‐risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain that are safe for early discharge. This protocol has been shown to significantly decrease health care resource utilization compared with usual care. However, the impact of the HEART Pathway on the cost of care has yet to be reported. Methods and Results: We performed a cost analysis of patients enrolled in the HEART Pathway trial, which randomized participants to either usual care or the HEART Pathway protocol. For low‐risk patients, the HEART Pathway recommended early discharge from the emergency department without further testing. We compared index visit cost, cost at 30 days, and cardiac‐related health care cost at 30 days between the 2 treatment arms. Costs for each patient included facility and professional costs. Cost at 30 days included total inpatient and outpatient costs, including the index encounter, regardless of etiology. Cardiac‐related health care cost at 30 days included the index encounter and costs adjudicated to be cardiac‐related within that period. Two hundred seventy of the 282 patients enrolled in the trial had cost data available for analysis. There was a significant reduction in cost for the HEART Pathway group at 30 days (median cost savings of

Anatomy of a Clerkship Test

216 per individual), which was most evident in low‐risk (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction score of 0‐1) patients (median savings of

Video-augmented feedback for procedural performance

253 per patient) and driven primarily by lower cardiac diagnostic costs in the HEART Pathway group. Conclusions: Using the HEART Pathway as a decision aid for patients with undifferentiated chest pain resulted in significant cost savings.

Chest Pain Risk Stratification: A Comparison of the 2-hour Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (adapt) and the Heart Pathway

Written examinations are frequently used to assess medical student performance. Within emergency medicine (EM), a National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examination for EM clerkships does not exist. As a result, clerkship directors frequently generate examinations within their institution. This article reviews the literature behind the use of standardized examinations in evaluating medical student performance, describes methods for generating well-written test questions, reviews the statistical concepts of reliability and validity that are necessary to evaluate an examination, and proposes future directions for testing EM students.

Consensus Development of a Pediatric Emergency Medicine Clerkship Curriculum

Abstract Background: Resident programs must assess residents’ achievement of core competencies for clinical and procedural skills. Aims: Video-augmented feedback may facilitate procedural skill acquisition and promote more accurate self-assessment. Methods: A randomized controlled study to investigate whether video-augmented verbal feedback leads to increased procedural skill and improved accuracy of self-assessment compared to verbal only feedback. Participants were evaluated during procedural training for ultrasound guided internal jugular central venous catheter (US IJ CVC) placement. All participants received feedback based on a validated 30-point checklist for US IJ CVC placement and validated 6-point procedural global rating scale. Results: Scores in both groups improved by a mean of 9.6 points (95% CI: 7.8–11.4) on the 30-point checklist, with no difference between groups in mean score improvement on the global rating scale. In regards to self-assessment, participant self-rating diverged from faculty scoring, increasingly so after receiving feedback. Residents rated highly by faculty underestimated their skill, while those rated more poorly demonstrated increasing overestimation. Conclusions: Accuracy of self-assessment was not improved by addition of video. While feedback advanced the skill of the resident, video-augmented feedback did not enhance skill acquisition or improve accuracy of resident self-assessment compared to standard feedback.