Suppr超能文献

在门诊环境中诊断和管理急性冠状动脉综合征:瑞士初级保健中良好的指南遵循情况。

Diagnosis and management of acute coronary syndrome in an outpatient setting: good guideline adherence in Swiss primary care.

机构信息

Research Associate Assistant Professor Professor, Director, Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland Research Associate, Health Care Ministry of the Canton of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

J Eval Clin Pract. 2013 Oct;19(5):819-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01856.x. Epub 2012 May 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Switzerland lacks of national guidelines for the initial treatment of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). ACS is not as frequent in an outpatient setting as in an emergency department; nevertheless, missing an ACS is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We wanted to observe actual infrastructure and performance based on case vignettes in outpatient general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists (CAs); as a second outcome, we wanted to compare GPs to CAs.

METHODS

We conducted a postal vignette-based survey to investigate the management of outpatients presenting with acute chest pain by doctors in private practice. The use of troponin and cardiac stress testing for the evaluation of acute chest pain as well as referral practice and use of antiplatelet agents were assessed and compared between GPs and CAs.

RESULTS

There were 507 of the 571 respondents (response rate 39.7%) who were CAs (36) or GPs (471) and were included in the analysis. Whereas all CAs were equipped with electrocardiogram (ECG), cardiac stress testing and troponin assays, the majority of GPs had an ECG (97.8%) and applied troponin testing (76.3%), and 38.7% performed cardiac stress testing. The vast majority responded to directly refer a STEMI to the next catheter lab (87.7%), or in the case of a troponin-positive NSTEMI, to an inpatient ward (94.1%) with no difference between GPs and CAs. A majority of the GPs responded to use antiplatelet agents in the case of a STEMI (89.6%) and reported further workup with cardiac stress testing in the case of a troponin-negative acute chest pain (78.7%), which was lower compared to CAs who applied antiplatelet agents and cardiac stress testing in 100% and 97.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

We could show that international guideline adherence in ACS of GPs is high and GPs perform as well as CAs. Nevertheless there is room for optimization in the antiplatelet therapy and the use of cardiac stress testing in a low-risk population. National guidelines for treatment of an ACS in an outpatient setting are indicated.

摘要

背景

瑞士缺乏急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)初始治疗的国家指南。ACS 在门诊环境中不如在急诊部门常见;然而,漏诊 ACS 与高发病率和死亡率相关。我们希望观察基于门诊全科医生(GP)和心脏病专家(CA)病例简述的实际基础设施和表现;作为第二个结果,我们希望将 GP 与 CA 进行比较。

方法

我们进行了一项基于邮寄病例简述的调查,以调查私人执业医生治疗急性胸痛门诊患者的管理情况。评估并比较了 GP 和 CA 对急性胸痛评估的肌钙蛋白和心脏负荷试验的使用情况以及转诊实践和抗血小板药物的使用情况。

结果

共有 571 名受访者中的 507 名(应答率 39.7%)为 CA(36 名)或 GP(471 名),并纳入分析。虽然所有 CA 都配备了心电图(ECG)、心脏负荷试验和肌钙蛋白检测,但大多数 GP 都有心电图(97.8%)并进行了肌钙蛋白检测(76.3%),38.7%进行了心脏负荷试验。绝大多数人直接将 STEMI 转至下一个导管实验室(87.7%),或在肌钙蛋白阳性 NSTEMI 的情况下,直接将患者转至住院病房(94.1%),GP 和 CA 之间没有差异。大多数 GP 在 STEMI 的情况下会使用抗血小板药物(89.6%),并报告在肌钙蛋白阴性急性胸痛的情况下进行心脏负荷试验进一步检查(78.7%),低于 100%和 97.0%使用抗血小板药物和心脏负荷试验的 CA。

结论

我们可以证明 GP 在 ACS 中遵循国际指南的比例很高,并且表现与 CA 一样好。然而,在低危人群中,抗血小板治疗和心脏负荷试验的使用仍有优化的空间。需要制定门诊 ACS 治疗的国家指南。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验