The impact of the HEART risk score in the early assessment of patients with acute chest pain: design of a stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial

Judith M Poldervaart, Johannes B Reitsma, Hendrik Koffijberg, Barbra E Backus, A Jacob Six, Pieter A Doevendans, Arno W Hoes, Judith M Poldervaart, Johannes B Reitsma, Hendrik Koffijberg, Barbra E Backus, A Jacob Six, Pieter A Doevendans, Arno W Hoes

Abstract

Background: Chest pain remains a diagnostic challenge: physicians do not want to miss an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but, they also wish to avoid unnecessary additional diagnostic procedures. In approximately 75% of the patients presenting with chest pain at the emergency department (ED) there is no underlying cardiac cause. Therefore, diagnostic strategies focus on identifying patients in whom an ACS can be safely ruled out based on findings from history, physical examination and early cardiac marker measurement. The HEART score, a clinical prediction rule, was developed to provide the clinician with a simple, early and reliable predictor of cardiac risk. We set out to quantify the impact of the use of the HEART score in daily practice on patient outcomes and costs.

Methods/design: We designed a prospective, multi-centre, stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial. Our aim is to include a total of 6600 unselected chest pain patients presenting at the ED in 10 Dutch hospitals during an 11-month period. All clusters (i.e. hospitals) start with a period of 'usual care' and are randomised in their timing when to switch to 'intervention care'. The latter involves the calculation of the HEART score in each patient to guide clinical decision; notably reassurance and discharge of patients with low scores and intensive monitoring and early intervention in patients with high HEART scores. Primary outcome is occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation or death within 6 weeks after presentation. Secondary outcomes include occurrence of MACE in low-risk patients, quality of life, use of health care resources and costs.

Discussion: Stepped wedge designs are increasingly used to evaluate the real-life effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions because of the following potential advantages: (a) each hospital has both a usual care and an intervention period, therefore, outcomes can be compared within and across hospitals; (b) each hospital will have an intervention period which enhances participation in case of a promising intervention; (c) all hospitals generate data about potential implementation problems. This large impact trial will generate evidence whether the anticipated benefits (in terms of safety and cost-effectiveness) of using the HEART score will indeed be achieved in real-life clinical practice.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov 80-82310-97-12154.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01756846.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The Stepped Wedge Design for the HEART Impact study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow of study and data collection in usual care period and in HEART period. ED: emergency department. QoL:quality of life. EQ-5D: EuroQol Five-Dimensional. SF-36: short-form 36. iPCQ: productivity cost questionnaire. MACE: major adverse cardiac events.

References

    1. Lee TH, Goldman L. Evaluation of the patient with acute chest pain. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1187–1195. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200004203421607.
    1. Swap CJ, Nagurney JT. Value and limitations of chest pain history in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2005;294:2623–2629. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.20.2623.
    1. Miller CD, Lindsell CJ, Khandelwal S, Chandra A, Pollack CV, Tiffany BR, Hollander JE, Gibler WB, Hoekstra JW. Is the initial diagnostic impression of “noncardiac chest pain” adequate to exclude cardiac disease? Ann Emerg Med. 2004;44:565–574. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.03.021.
    1. Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P. Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ. 2009;338:b606. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b606.
    1. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, Bridges CR, Califf RM, Casey DE Jr, Chavey WE 2nd, Fesmire FM, Hochman JS, Levin TN, Lincoff AM, Peterson ED, Theroux P, Wenger NK, Wright RS, Smith SC Jr, Jacobs AK, Adams CD, Anderson JL, Antman EM, Halperin JL, Hunt SA, Krumholz HM, Kushner FG, Lytle BW, Nishimura R, Ornato JP, Page RL, Riegel B. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-Elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:e1–157.
    1. Hamm CW, Bassand JP, Agewall S, Bax J, Boersma E, Bueno H, Caso P, Dudek D, Gielen S, Huber K, Ohman M, Petrie MC, Sonntag F, Uva MS, Storey RF, Wijns W, Zahger D. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(23):2999–3054.
    1. Fox KA, Dabbous OH, Goldberg RJ, Pieper KS, Eagle KA, Van de Werf F, Avezum A, Goodman SG, Flather MD, Anderson FA Jr, Granger CB. Prediction of risk of death and myocardial infarction in the six months after presentation with acute coronary syndrome: prospective multinational observational study (GRACE) BMJ. 2006;333:1091. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38985.646481.55.
    1. Antman EM, Cohen M, Bernink PJ, McCabe CH, Horacek T, Papuchis G, Mautner B, Corbalan R, Radley D, Braunwald E. The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/ non-ST elevation MI. JAMA. 2000;284:835–842. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.7.835.
    1. de Araújo GP, Ferreira J, Aguiar C, Seabra-Gomes R. TIMI, PURSUIT, and GRACE risk scores: sustained prognostic value and interaction with revascularization in NSTE-ACS. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:865–872. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi187.
    1. Apgar V. A proposal for a new method of evaluation of the newborn infant. Curr Res Anesth Analg. 1953;32(4):260–7.
    1. Six AJ, Backus BE, Kelder JC. Chest pain in the emergency room: value of the HEART score. Neth Heart J. 2008;16:191–6. doi: 10.1007/BF03086144.
    1. Backus BE, Six AJ, Kelder JC, Mast TP, van den Akker F, Mast EG, Monnink SH, van Tooren RM, Doevendans PA. Chest pain in the emergency room; a multicenter validation of the HEART score. Crit Path Cardiology. 2010;9:164–169. doi: 10.1097/HPC.0b013e3181ec36d8.
    1. Backus BE, Six AJ, Kelder JC, Bosschaert MAR, Mast EG, Mosterd A, Veldkamp RF, Wardeh AJ, Tio R, Braam R, Monnink SHJ, van Tooren R, Mast TP, van den Akker F, Cramer MJM, Poldervaart JM, Hoes AW, Doevendans PA. A prospective validation of the HEART score for chest pain patients at the emergency department. Int J Cardiol. 2013. pp. S0167–5273. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.01.255.
    1. Six AJ, Cullen L, Backus BE, Greenslade J, Parsonage W, Aldous S, Doevendans PA, Than M. The HEART score for the assessment of patients with chest pain in the emergency department: a multinational validation study. Crit Path Car. 2013;12:121–126.
    1. Pope JH, Aufderheide TP, Ruthazer R, Woolard RH, Feldman JA, Beshansky JR, Griffith JL, Selker HP. Missed diagnoses of acute cardiac ischemia in the emergency department. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1163–1170. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200004203421603.
    1. Schull MJ, Vermeulen MJ, Stukel TA. The risk of missed diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction associated with emergency department volume. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48:647–55. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.03.025.
    1. Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-54.
    1. Brown C, Hofer T, Johal A, Thomson R, Nicholl J, Franklin BD, Lilford RJ. An epistemology of patient safety research: a framework for study design and interpretation: part 2. study design. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17:163. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2007.023648.
    1. Moons KG, Kengne AP, Grobbee DE, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Altman DG, Woodward M. Risk prediction models: II: external validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart. 2012;98(9):691–8. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301247.
    1. Bruins Slot MH, van der Heijden GJ, Rutten FH, van der Spoel OP, Mast EG, Bredero AC, Doevendans PA, Glatz JF, Hoes AW. Heart-type fatty acid-binding protein in acute myocardial infarction evaluation (FAME): background and design of a diagnostic study in primary care. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2008;8:8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-8-8.
    1. Molenberghs G, Verbeke G. Models for discrete longitudinal data. Springer; New York; 2005.
    1. Richtlijnen voor farmaco-economisch onderzoek – geactualiseerde versie 2006 [Guidelines for pharmaco-economic research] Diemen: College voor Zorgverzekeringen (CvZ) [Health Insurance Board]; 2006.
    1. Oostenbrink JB, Bouwmans CAM, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH. Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek, methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg - geactualiseerde versie 2004. Diemen: College voor Zorgverzekeringen (CvZ) [Health Insurance Board]; 2004.
    1. Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17:479–500. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200017050-00006.
    1. Reilly BM, Evans AT. Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144:201e9.
    1. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15:361e87.
    1. Justice AC, Covinsky KE, Berlin JA. Assessing the generalizability of prognostic information. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:515e24.
    1. Mdege ND, Man MS, Taylor Nee Brown CA, Torgerson DJ. Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(9):936–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.12.003.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera