Moniek Koopman, Robert Willemsen, Carine Doggen, Bastiaan Kietselaer, Peter van Ooijen, Jan Willem Gratama, Richard Braam, Geert-Jan Dinant, Rykel van Bruggen, Pim van der Harst, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart
{"title":"Primary care patients' perspectives on CT coronary calcium scoring and exercise electrocardiography.","authors":"Moniek Koopman, Robert Willemsen, Carine Doggen, Bastiaan Kietselaer, Peter van Ooijen, Jan Willem Gratama, Richard Braam, Geert-Jan Dinant, Rykel van Bruggen, Pim van der Harst, Rozemarijn Vliegenthart","doi":"10.1080/13814788.2025.2545304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computed tomography coronary calcium scoring (CT-CCS) shows higher sensitivity for obstructive coronary artery disease (OCAD) detection than exercise electrocardiography (x-ECG), but its role as initial diagnostic test in primary care remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>This study assessed patients' perspectives on CT-CCS or x-ECG testing and diagnostic results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this one-year pilot study, 38 general practitioner practices were included. After cluster randomisation, 19 practices were assigned to refer patients with atypical angina pectoris or non-specific thoracic complaints for CT-CCS and 19 practices were assigned to request x-ECG. Patients' management remained at the discretion of the GPs. Patients' perspectives on the diagnostic test were assessed through a questionnaire, and clinical data were collected using electronic patient records. Outcome measures included patients' perspectives, OCAD diagnosis and initiation of cardiovascular risk management (CVRM).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>101 patients (25 x-ECG; 76 CT-CCS) were included. Overall, CT-CCS patients were more satisfied with the test compared to x-ECG patients (<i>p</i> < 0.001), found the test easier to undergo (<i>p</i> < 0.001), had a higher willingness to retest (<i>p</i> = 0.01) and better perception of the information received from the GP (<i>p</i> = 0.03). Four of 17 CT-CCS patients (24%) with CT-CCS ≥100 were diagnosed with OCAD, and 14 (82%) started CVRM. The only patient with a positive x-ECG out of 25 (4%) was included in CVRM but not diagnosed with OCAD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CT-CCS patients were overall more satisfied with their test than x-ECG patients. Coronary calcium scoring is a promising diagnostic tool for detecting OCAD in primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":54380,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of General Practice","volume":"31 1","pages":"2545304"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392426/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2025.2545304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Computed tomography coronary calcium scoring (CT-CCS) shows higher sensitivity for obstructive coronary artery disease (OCAD) detection than exercise electrocardiography (x-ECG), but its role as initial diagnostic test in primary care remains unclear.
Objective(s): This study assessed patients' perspectives on CT-CCS or x-ECG testing and diagnostic results.
Methods: In this one-year pilot study, 38 general practitioner practices were included. After cluster randomisation, 19 practices were assigned to refer patients with atypical angina pectoris or non-specific thoracic complaints for CT-CCS and 19 practices were assigned to request x-ECG. Patients' management remained at the discretion of the GPs. Patients' perspectives on the diagnostic test were assessed through a questionnaire, and clinical data were collected using electronic patient records. Outcome measures included patients' perspectives, OCAD diagnosis and initiation of cardiovascular risk management (CVRM).
Results: 101 patients (25 x-ECG; 76 CT-CCS) were included. Overall, CT-CCS patients were more satisfied with the test compared to x-ECG patients (p < 0.001), found the test easier to undergo (p < 0.001), had a higher willingness to retest (p = 0.01) and better perception of the information received from the GP (p = 0.03). Four of 17 CT-CCS patients (24%) with CT-CCS ≥100 were diagnosed with OCAD, and 14 (82%) started CVRM. The only patient with a positive x-ECG out of 25 (4%) was included in CVRM but not diagnosed with OCAD.
Conclusion: CT-CCS patients were overall more satisfied with their test than x-ECG patients. Coronary calcium scoring is a promising diagnostic tool for detecting OCAD in primary care.
背景:计算机断层扫描冠状动脉钙评分(CT-CCS)对阻塞性冠状动脉疾病(OCAD)的检测灵敏度高于运动心电图(x-ECG),但其作为初级保健初始诊断试验的作用尚不清楚。目的:本研究评估患者对CT-CCS或x-ECG检查和诊断结果的看法。方法:在这项为期一年的初步研究中,纳入了38名全科医生。在随机分组后,19家医院被分配给有非典型心绞痛或非特异性胸椎疾患的患者进行CT-CCS检查,19家医院被分配给要求x-ECG检查的患者。病人的管理仍由全科医生自行决定。通过问卷调查评估患者对诊断测试的看法,并使用电子病历收集临床数据。结果测量包括患者的观点、OCAD诊断和心血管风险管理(CVRM)的开始。结果:纳入101例患者(25例x-ECG, 76例CT-CCS)。总体而言,与x-ECG患者相比,CT-CCS患者对测试更满意(p p p = 0.01),对GP信息的感知更好(p = 0.03)。17例CT-CCS≥100的患者中有4例(24%)被诊断为OCAD, 14例(82%)开始了CVRM。25例患者中唯一x-ECG阳性的患者(4%)被纳入crvrm,但未被诊断为OCAD。结论:CT-CCS患者总体满意度高于x-ECG患者。冠状动脉钙评分是一种很有前途的诊断工具,用于检测OCAD的初级保健。
期刊介绍:
The EJGP aims to:
foster scientific research in primary care medicine (family medicine, general practice) in Europe
stimulate education and debate, relevant for the development of primary care medicine in Europe.
Scope
The EJGP publishes original research papers, review articles and clinical case reports on all aspects of primary care medicine (family medicine, general practice), providing new knowledge on medical decision-making, healthcare delivery, medical education, and research methodology.
Areas covered include primary care epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, non-drug interventions, multi- and comorbidity, palliative care, shared decision making, inter-professional collaboration, quality and safety, training and teaching, and quantitative and qualitative research methods.