Abstract
BackgroundChest pain is a common symptom in urgent primary care. The distinction between urgent and non-urgent causes can be challenging. A modified version of the HEART score, in which troponin is omitted (‘simplified HEART’) or replaced by the so-called ‘sense of alarm’ (HEART-GP), may aid in risk stratification.MethodThis study involved a retrospective, observational cohort of consecutive patients evaluated for chest pain at a large-scale, out-of-hours, regional primary care facility in the Netherlands, with 6‑week follow-up for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The outcome of interest is diagnostic accuracy, including positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).ResultsWe included 664 patients; MACEs occurred in 4.8% (n = 32). For simplified HEART and HEART-GP, we found C‑statistics of 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80–0.91) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.85–0.95), respectively. Optimal diagnostic accuracy was found for a simplified HEART score ≥2 (PPV 9%, NPV 99.7%), HEART-GP score ≥3 (PPV 11%, NPV 99.7%) and HEART-GP score ≥4 (PPV 16%, NPV 99.4%). Physicians referred 157 patients (23.6%) and missed 6 MACEs. A simplified HEART score ≥2 would have picked up 5 cases, at the expense of 332 referrals (50.0%, p < 0.001). A HEART-GP score of ≥3 and ≥4 would have detected 5 and 3 MACEs and led to 293 (44.1%, p < 0.001) and 186 (28.0%, p = 0.18) referrals, respectively.ConclusionHEART-score modifications including the physicians’ ‘sense of alarm’ may be used as a risk stratification tool for chest pain in primary care in the absence of routine access to troponin assays. Further validation is warranted.Supplementary InformationThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-020-01529-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
Chest pain is a common reason for consulting general practitioners (GPs)
For simplified HEART and HEARTGP, we found C-statistics of 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80–0.91) and 0.90, respectively
Optimal diagnostic accuracy was found for a simplified HEART score ≥2 (PPV 9%, negative predictive value (NPV) 99.7%), HEART-GP score ≥3 (PPV 11%, NPV 99.7%) and HEART-GP score ≥4 (PPV 16%, NPV 99.4%)
Summary
Chest pain is a common reason for consulting general practitioners (GPs). Approximately 1–4% of all new episodes are related to chest pain [1,2,3,4,5]. The principle task for GPs lies in differentiating urgent (but uncommon) causes of chest pain from the less urgent underlying conditions of the majority of patients [2, 6]. To make this differentiation GPs mainly depend on prior experience, past medical history, and careful history taking, at times a rather tricky endeavour [7, 8]. In this study we evaluated the diagnostic performance of a simplified HEART score (omitting troponin) and HEART-GP score (replacing troponin with sense of alarm) to risk-stratify patients with chest pain in urgent primary care. The outcome of interest is diagnostic accuracy, including positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.