EDACS-ADP在急诊科胸痛患者中的临床应用

Q3 Health Professions
I. Akbas, Z. Çakır, A. Koçak, Alpaslan Ünlü, Nazım Onur Can, M. Vural, M. Köse
{"title":"EDACS-ADP在急诊科胸痛患者中的临床应用","authors":"I. Akbas, Z. Çakır, A. Koçak, Alpaslan Ünlü, Nazım Onur Can, M. Vural, M. Köse","doi":"10.5603/DEMJ.A2021.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity. An ACS diagnosis can be made with electrocardiogram (ECG) and cardiac markers. However, despite medical advances, 2–5% of ACS patients are undiagnosed and discharged from emergency departments (EDs) because clinicians often find it difficult not only to diagnose and treat high-risk patients but also to define nonemergency diseases or safely discharge healthy patients. Risk stratification can be prevented, and inappropriate diagnosis and treatment protocols can be identified. The ED Assessment of Chest Pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) scoring system, developed to identify patients with chest pain but at low risk for a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), is the first score based on clinical data from emergency medicine. OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the usability of EDACS-ADP in Turkey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of 392 patients. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) within thirty days. RESULTS: A total of 116 MACEs occurred in 65 (16,6%) patients during a one-month follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (+ LR), and negative likelihood ratio (–LR) values of the EDACS-ADP score for the evaluation of 30-day MACE rate in patients who admitted with chest pain for two months were as follows: 96.9%, 64.5%, 35.2%, 99.1%, + LR: 2.73, and –LR: 0.05. CONCLUSION: Most of these patients were classified by the EDACS-ADP as low risk and suitable for discharge. The 30-day MACE rate of development was significantly low (0.9%) and acceptable in patients grouped as low risk.","PeriodicalId":52339,"journal":{"name":"Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical utility of EDACS-ADP in patients admitted with chest pain to an emergency department\",\"authors\":\"I. Akbas, Z. Çakır, A. Koçak, Alpaslan Ünlü, Nazım Onur Can, M. Vural, M. Köse\",\"doi\":\"10.5603/DEMJ.A2021.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity. An ACS diagnosis can be made with electrocardiogram (ECG) and cardiac markers. However, despite medical advances, 2–5% of ACS patients are undiagnosed and discharged from emergency departments (EDs) because clinicians often find it difficult not only to diagnose and treat high-risk patients but also to define nonemergency diseases or safely discharge healthy patients. Risk stratification can be prevented, and inappropriate diagnosis and treatment protocols can be identified. The ED Assessment of Chest Pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) scoring system, developed to identify patients with chest pain but at low risk for a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), is the first score based on clinical data from emergency medicine. OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the usability of EDACS-ADP in Turkey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of 392 patients. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) within thirty days. RESULTS: A total of 116 MACEs occurred in 65 (16,6%) patients during a one-month follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (+ LR), and negative likelihood ratio (–LR) values of the EDACS-ADP score for the evaluation of 30-day MACE rate in patients who admitted with chest pain for two months were as follows: 96.9%, 64.5%, 35.2%, 99.1%, + LR: 2.73, and –LR: 0.05. CONCLUSION: Most of these patients were classified by the EDACS-ADP as low risk and suitable for discharge. The 30-day MACE rate of development was significantly low (0.9%) and acceptable in patients grouped as low risk.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5603/DEMJ.A2021.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/DEMJ.A2021.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)是导致死亡和发病的常见原因。ACS的诊断可以通过心电图(ECG)和心脏标志物进行。然而,尽管医学取得了进步,仍有2-5%的ACS患者未被诊断并从急诊科出院,因为临床医生经常发现不仅难以诊断和治疗高危患者,而且难以定义非紧急疾病或安全地让健康患者出院。可以防止风险分层,并可以确定不适当的诊断和治疗方案。ED胸痛评估评分加速诊断方案(EDACS-ADP)评分系统是第一个基于急诊医学临床数据的评分系统,旨在识别胸痛但发生重大心脏不良事件(MACE)风险较低的患者。目的:本研究调查EDACS-ADP在土耳其的可用性。材料和方法:这是一项针对392名患者的前瞻性观察性研究。主要结果是30天内发生重大心血管不良事件(MACE)。结果:在一个月的随访中,65名(16,6%)患者共发生116例MACE。EDACS-ADP评分用于评估胸痛患者两个月内30天MACE发生率的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)、阳性似然比(+LR)和阴性似然比(-LR)如下:96.9%、64.5%、35.2%、99.1%、+LR:2.73和-LR:0.05。结论:EDACS-ADP将这些患者中的大多数分类为低风险且适合出院。30天的MACE发生率显著较低(0.9%),在低风险患者中可接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical utility of EDACS-ADP in patients admitted with chest pain to an emergency department
BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity. An ACS diagnosis can be made with electrocardiogram (ECG) and cardiac markers. However, despite medical advances, 2–5% of ACS patients are undiagnosed and discharged from emergency departments (EDs) because clinicians often find it difficult not only to diagnose and treat high-risk patients but also to define nonemergency diseases or safely discharge healthy patients. Risk stratification can be prevented, and inappropriate diagnosis and treatment protocols can be identified. The ED Assessment of Chest Pain Score-Accelerated Diagnostic Protocol (EDACS-ADP) scoring system, developed to identify patients with chest pain but at low risk for a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), is the first score based on clinical data from emergency medicine. OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the usability of EDACS-ADP in Turkey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational study of 392 patients. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) within thirty days. RESULTS: A total of 116 MACEs occurred in 65 (16,6%) patients during a one-month follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (+ LR), and negative likelihood ratio (–LR) values of the EDACS-ADP score for the evaluation of 30-day MACE rate in patients who admitted with chest pain for two months were as follows: 96.9%, 64.5%, 35.2%, 99.1%, + LR: 2.73, and –LR: 0.05. CONCLUSION: Most of these patients were classified by the EDACS-ADP as low risk and suitable for discharge. The 30-day MACE rate of development was significantly low (0.9%) and acceptable in patients grouped as low risk.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal
Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信