Suppr超能文献

对荷兰九家医院急诊科HEART(病史、心电图、年龄、危险因素和肌钙蛋白)评分计算错误的频率、情况及后果进行二次分析。

Secondary analysis of frequency, circumstances and consequences of calculation errors of the HEART (history, ECG, age, risk factors and troponin) score at the emergency departments of nine hospitals in the Netherlands.

作者信息

Ras Marten, Reitsma Johannes B, Hoes Arno W, Six Alfred Jacob, Poldervaart Judith M

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 22;7(10):e017259. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017259.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The HEART score can accurately stratify the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients with chest pain. We investigated the frequency, circumstances and potential consequences of errors in its calculation.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of a stepped wedge trial of patients with chest pain presenting to nine Dutch emergency departments. We recalculated HEART scores for all patients by re-evaluating the elements age (A), risk factors (R) and troponin (T) and compared these new scores with those given by physicians in daily practice. We investigated which circumstances increased the probability of incorrect scoring and explored the potential consequences.

RESULTS

The HEART score was incorrectly scored in 266 out of 1752 patients (15.2%; 95% CI 13.5% to 16.9%). Most errors occurred in the R ('Risk factors') element (61%). Time of admission, and patient's age or gender did not contribute to errors, but more errors were made in patients with higher scores. In 102 patients (5.8%, 95% CI 4.7% to 6.9%) the incorrect HEART score resulted in incorrect risk categorisation (too low or too high). Patients with an incorrectly calculated HEART score had a higher risk of MACE (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.50), which was largely related to more errors being made in patients with higher HEART scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the HEART score was incorrectly calculated in 15% of patients, leading to inappropriate risk categorisation in 5.8% which may have led to suboptimal clinical decision-making and management. Actions should be taken to improve the score's use in daily practice.

摘要

目的

HEART评分能够准确地对胸痛患者发生主要不良心脏事件(MACE)的风险进行分层。我们研究了其计算错误的频率、情况及潜在后果。

方法

我们对在荷兰9家急诊科就诊的胸痛患者进行的一项阶梯楔形试验进行了二次分析。通过重新评估年龄(A)、危险因素(R)和肌钙蛋白(T)等因素,我们重新计算了所有患者的HEART评分,并将这些新评分与医生在日常实践中给出的评分进行比较。我们研究了哪些情况会增加评分错误的可能性,并探讨了潜在后果。

结果

1752例患者中有266例(15.2%;95%CI 13.5%至16.9%)的HEART评分计算错误。大多数错误发生在R(“危险因素”)因素中(61%)。入院时间、患者年龄或性别与错误无关,但评分较高的患者错误更多。在102例患者中(5.8%,95%CI 4.7%至6.9%),错误的HEART评分导致了错误的风险分类(过低或过高)。HEART评分计算错误的患者发生MACE的风险更高(OR 1.85;95%CI 1.37至2.50),这在很大程度上与HEART评分较高的患者错误更多有关。

结论

我们的结果表明,15%的患者HEART评分计算错误,导致5.8%的患者风险分类不当,这可能导致临床决策和管理欠佳。应采取行动以改善该评分在日常实践中的应用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e75b/5665257/f3744f604589/bmjopen-2017-017259f01.jpg

相似文献

2
Prehospital Modified HEART Score Predictive of 30-Day Adverse Cardiac Events.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018 Feb;33(1):58-62. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X17007154. Epub 2018 Jan 10.
5
A prospective validation of the HEART score for chest pain patients at the emergency department.
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Oct 3;168(3):2153-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.01.255. Epub 2013 Mar 7.
10
A retrospective external validation study of the HEART score among patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain.
Intern Emerg Med. 2018 Aug;13(5):727-748. doi: 10.1007/s11739-017-1743-4. Epub 2017 Sep 11.

本文引用的文献

8
Chest pain in the emergency department: risk stratification with Manchester triage system and HEART score.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2015 Jun 11;15:48. doi: 10.1186/s12872-015-0049-6.
9
Discrepancy between clinician and research assistant in TIMI score calculation (TRIAGED CPU).
West J Emerg Med. 2015 Jan;16(1):24-33. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2014.9.21685. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
10
When is low-risk chest pain acceptable risk chest pain?
Heart. 2014 Sep 15;100(18):1402-3. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-306177. Epub 2014 Jun 19.

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