Alrefaee Anas, Eltawansy Sherif, Alshami Abbas, Łajczak Paweł, Udongwo Ndausung, Ayob George, Selan Jeffrey
Division of Cardiology, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, Neptune, NJ 07753, USA.
Department of Medicine, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, Neptune, NJ 07753, USA.
J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 19;14(4):1372. doi: 10.3390/jcm14041372.
Chest pain is a prevalent and critical complaint among patients in emergency departments (EDs) across the United States. Professional societies have refined clinical guidelines to establish the most effective diagnostic pathways for identifying obstructive coronary artery disease. However, many healthcare systems do not adhere to the guideline-validated clinical pathways and instead order repeat diagnostic testing. This study evaluated the efficiency of care delivered to chest pain patients in our tertiary medical center. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients presenting to our ED with acute chest pain between November and December 2022, collecting information about chest pain, the testing received, and their outcomes. The data were then reviewed to determine clinical practice patterns. We included 342 patients, with a mean age of 54 years; 54.7% of study participants were females. Patients who were eventually admitted from the ED (46.5%, = 159) were either under observation or inpatient status. Furthermore, 16.6%, = 57, of patients had an ischemic evaluation within the preceding year. Physicians documented a HEART score in 24.6%, = 84 of the patients. While HEART score is a considerable factor utilized by admitting physicians to triage incoming patients, 39%, = 62, of all admitted patients had a low HEART score (<3) and a negative ischemic evaluation within the past year. This single-center retrospective analysis of care delivery for non-ACS (acute coronary syndrome) chest pain patients demonstrated that the HEART score was not thoroughly documented in the study population. This resulted in an overperformance of inpatient ischemic testing, with an increased length of stay and costs for the institution and healthcare system. This study serves as a quality improvement initiative to explore similar data within their institutions and as a reminder of the importance of utilizing validated clinical pathways to streamline clinical care and reduce healthcare costs.
胸痛是美国急诊科患者中普遍且危急的主诉。专业协会已完善临床指南,以确立识别阻塞性冠状动脉疾病最有效的诊断途径。然而,许多医疗系统并未遵循经指南验证的临床路径,而是安排重复诊断检测。本研究评估了我们三级医疗中心为胸痛患者提供的护理效率。我们对2022年11月至12月期间因急性胸痛就诊于我们急诊科的患者进行了回顾性病历审查,收集了有关胸痛、接受的检测及其结果的信息。然后对数据进行审查以确定临床实践模式。我们纳入了342例患者,平均年龄54岁;54.7%的研究参与者为女性。最终从急诊科收治的患者(46.5%,n = 159)处于观察或住院状态。此外,16.6%(n = 57)的患者在前一年进行过缺血性评估。医生为24.6%(n = 84)的患者记录了HEART评分。虽然HEART评分是收治医生用于对前来就诊患者进行分诊的一个重要因素,但在所有收治患者中,39%(n = 62)的患者HEART评分较低(<3)且在过去一年缺血性评估为阴性。这项针对非急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)胸痛患者护理的单中心回顾性分析表明,研究人群中未充分记录HEART评分。这导致住院缺血性检测过度进行,增加了住院时间以及机构和医疗系统的成本。本研究旨在作为一项质量改进举措,以探索其机构内的类似数据,并提醒人们利用经过验证的临床路径来简化临床护理和降低医疗成本的重要性。