Şebnem Zeynep Eke Kurt, Uğur Durmuş, Erdem Kurt, Suphi Bahadırlı
{"title":"Time-stratified HEART score discrimination and calibration in emergency chest pain: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Şebnem Zeynep Eke Kurt, Uğur Durmuş, Erdem Kurt, Suphi Bahadırlı","doi":"10.1186/s12873-026-01652-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>We compared HEART score discriminative performance and calibration for 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between off-hours and on-hours emergency department chest pain presentations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital from January 2020 through December 2025, enrolling 2,800 patients (off-hours n = 2,133; on-hours n = 667). Off-hours comprised evenings, nights, weekends, and public holidays. The primary outcome was 30-day MACE, defined as acute myocardial infarction, unplanned coronary revascularization, cardiac arrest, or all-cause death. Discrimination was compared by the DeLong method; an absolute between-group AUC difference below 0.08, set a priori, was used as the margin of clinical similarity. Calibration was assessed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, observed-to-expected ratio, and calibration slope.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>30-day MACE occurred in 14.4% of 2,800 patients. The HEART score AUC was 0.830 (95% CI 0.805-0.855) in off-hours and 0.821 (95% CI 0.778-0.865) in on-hours patients; ΔAUC was + 0.009 (95% CI -0.041 to + 0.058; p = 0.736), with the confidence interval contained within the a priori margin. At the rule-out threshold (HEART ≥ 4), off-hours sensitivity was 95.7% (95% CI 92.8-97.5%) and negative predictive value (NPV) was 97.7% (95% CI 96.2-98.7%). No differential shift effect was detected (interaction OR 1.039; 95% CI 0.867-1.247; p = 0.676). Both groups demonstrated systematic overestimation of absolute MACE risk relative to Backus 2013 probabilities (off-hours calibration intercept - 0.352; 95% CI -0.495 to -0.208; p < 0.001), with no between-group difference (p = 0.998).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The HEART score showed clinically similar discrimination for 30-day MACE regardless of presentation time, supporting its use across different presentation times in tertiary-care settings with comparable infrastructure, pending prospective multicenter confirmation. Local recalibration of absolute risk estimates should be considered before probability-guided triage protocols are implemented in comparable settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13520530/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-026-01652-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: We compared HEART score discriminative performance and calibration for 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between off-hours and on-hours emergency department chest pain presentations.
Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at Istanbul Medipol Mega University Hospital from January 2020 through December 2025, enrolling 2,800 patients (off-hours n = 2,133; on-hours n = 667). Off-hours comprised evenings, nights, weekends, and public holidays. The primary outcome was 30-day MACE, defined as acute myocardial infarction, unplanned coronary revascularization, cardiac arrest, or all-cause death. Discrimination was compared by the DeLong method; an absolute between-group AUC difference below 0.08, set a priori, was used as the margin of clinical similarity. Calibration was assessed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, observed-to-expected ratio, and calibration slope.
Results: 30-day MACE occurred in 14.4% of 2,800 patients. The HEART score AUC was 0.830 (95% CI 0.805-0.855) in off-hours and 0.821 (95% CI 0.778-0.865) in on-hours patients; ΔAUC was + 0.009 (95% CI -0.041 to + 0.058; p = 0.736), with the confidence interval contained within the a priori margin. At the rule-out threshold (HEART ≥ 4), off-hours sensitivity was 95.7% (95% CI 92.8-97.5%) and negative predictive value (NPV) was 97.7% (95% CI 96.2-98.7%). No differential shift effect was detected (interaction OR 1.039; 95% CI 0.867-1.247; p = 0.676). Both groups demonstrated systematic overestimation of absolute MACE risk relative to Backus 2013 probabilities (off-hours calibration intercept - 0.352; 95% CI -0.495 to -0.208; p < 0.001), with no between-group difference (p = 0.998).
Conclusion: The HEART score showed clinically similar discrimination for 30-day MACE regardless of presentation time, supporting its use across different presentation times in tertiary-care settings with comparable infrastructure, pending prospective multicenter confirmation. Local recalibration of absolute risk estimates should be considered before probability-guided triage protocols are implemented in comparable settings.
目的:我们比较了非工作时间和工作时间急诊科胸痛表现的30天主要不良心脏事件(MACE)的HEART评分判别性能和校准。方法:2020年1月至2025年12月在伊斯坦布尔Medipol Mega大学医院进行了一项单中心回顾性队列研究,纳入了2800名患者(非工作时间n = 2133;工作时间n = 667)。下班时间包括晚上、晚上、周末和公共假日。主要终点为30天MACE,定义为急性心肌梗死、计划外冠状动脉血运重建术、心脏骤停或全因死亡。采用德龙法比较辨别力;先验设定的组间绝对AUC差值小于0.08作为临床相似的裕度。通过Hosmer-Lemeshow检验、观察期望比和校准斜率评估校准。结果:2800例患者中,30天MACE发生率为14.4%。非工作时间患者的HEART评分AUC为0.830 (95% CI 0.805-0.855),工作时间患者的HEART评分AUC为0.821 (95% CI 0.778-0.865);ΔAUC = + 0.009 (95% CI -0.041 ~ + 0.058; p = 0.736),置信区间包含在先验边际内。在排除阈值(HEART≥4)下,非工作时间敏感性为95.7% (95% CI 92.8-97.5%),阴性预测值(NPV)为97.7% (95% CI 96.2-98.7%)。未检测到差异移位效应(交互作用OR 1.039; 95% CI 0.867-1.247; p = 0.676)。与Backus 2013概率相比,两组患者均表现出系统性高估MACE绝对风险(非工作时间校准截距- 0.352;95% CI -0.495至-0.208;p)。结论:无论就诊时间如何,HEART评分对30天MACE的临床歧视相似,支持其在具有可比基础设施的三级医疗机构不同就诊时间的使用,有待于前瞻性多中心确认。在可比较的环境中实施概率引导的分诊方案之前,应考虑对绝对风险估计进行局部重新校准。
期刊介绍:
BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.