Effectiveness of EDACS Versus ADAPT Accelerated Diagnostic Pathways for Chest Pain: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Embedded Within Practice
Martin P Than, John W Pickering, Sally J Aldous, Louise Cullen, Christopher M A Frampton, W Frank Peacock, Allan S Jaffe, Steve W Goodacre, A Mark Richards, Michael W Ardagh, Joanne M Deely, Chris M Florkowski, Peter George, Gregory J Hamilton, David L Jardine, Richard W Troughton, Pieter van Wyk, Joanna M Young, Laura Bannister, Sally J Lord, Martin P Than, John W Pickering, Sally J Aldous, Louise Cullen, Christopher M A Frampton, W Frank Peacock, Allan S Jaffe, Steve W Goodacre, A Mark Richards, Michael W Ardagh, Joanne M Deely, Chris M Florkowski, Peter George, Gregory J Hamilton, David L Jardine, Richard W Troughton, Pieter van Wyk, Joanna M Young, Laura Bannister, Sally J Lord
Abstract
Study objective: A 2-hour accelerated diagnostic pathway based on the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction score, ECG, and troponin measures (ADAPT-ADP) increased early discharge of patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction presenting to the emergency department compared with standard care (from 11% to 19.3%). Observational studies suggest that an accelerated diagnostic pathway using the Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS-ADP) may further increase this proportion. This trial tests for the existence and size of any beneficial effect of using the EDACS-ADP in routine clinical care.
Methods: This was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of adults with suspected acute myocardial infarction, comparing the ADAPT-ADP and the EDACS-ADP. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients discharged to outpatient care within 6 hours of attendance, without subsequent major adverse cardiac event within 30 days.
Results: Five hundred fifty-eight patients were recruited, 279 in each arm. Sixty-six patients (11.8%) had a major adverse cardiac event within 30 days (ADAPT-ADP 29; EDACS-ADP 37); 11.1% more patients (95% confidence interval 2.8% to 19.4%) were identified as low risk in EDACS-ADP (41.6%) than in ADAPT-ADP (30.5%). No low-risk patients had a major adverse cardiac event within 30 days (0.0% [0.0% to 1.9%]). There was no difference in the primary outcome of proportion discharged within 6 hours (EDACS-ADP 32.3%; ADAPT-ADP 34.4%; difference -2.1% [-10.3% to 6.0%], P=.65).
Conclusion: There was no difference in the proportion of patients discharged early despite more patients being classified as low risk by the EDACS-ADP than the ADAPT-ADP. Both accelerated diagnostic pathways are effective strategies for chest pain assessment and resulted in an increased rate of early discharges compared with previously reported rates.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Source: PubMed