The Impact of Unstable Angina Guidelines in the Triage of Emergency Department Patients with Possible Acute Coronary Syndrome

David A. Katz, Tom P. Aufderheide, Mark Bogner, Peter R. Rahko, Roger L. Brown, Lisa M. Brown, Matthew E. Prekker and Harry P. Selker
Additional contact information
David A. Katz: Department of Medicine, Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin – Madison; SE626 GH, Center for Research in the Implementation of Innovative Strategies in Practice (CRIISP) VA Iowa Health Care Systems, Iowa City, IA 52246-2208; phone: (319) 338-0581, ext. 7598; fax: (319) 887-4932 david-katz@uiowa.edu
Tom P. Aufderheide: Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin – Milwaukee
Mark Bogner: Department of Medicine, Section of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin – Madison
Peter R. Rahko: Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin – Madison
Roger L. Brown: Department of, Nursing, University of Wisconsin – Madison
Matthew E. Prekker: Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin – Madison

Medical Decision Making, 2006, vol. 26, issue 6, 606-616

Abstract: Objective. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether implementing the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) Unstable Angina Practice Guideline improves emergency physician's decision making in patients with symptoms of possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS), including those for whom the diagnosis of unstable angina is uncertain. Methods . The authors conducted a prospective guideline implementation trial with pre-post design in the emergency departments of 1 university hospital and 1 university-affiliated community teaching hospital from January 2000 to May 2001. They enrolled 1140 adults who presented with chest pain or other symptoms of possible ACS. The intervention included the following: 1) physician training in use of the AHCPR risk groups, 2) algorithm for risk stratification, and 3) group feedback. To determine how accurately physicians interpreted the guideline algorithm, the authors compared their risk ratings with actual guideline risk groups. Results . No significant difference in physician triage decisions was observed between baseline and intervention periods. Analysis of physician's risk ratings during the intervention period revealed low overall concordance with actual guideline risk groups (kappa = 0.31); however, physician's risk ratings showed superior discrimination in identifying patients with confirmed ACS (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] area .81 v. .74, P = 0.008). Strict adherence to guideline recommendations would have resulted in hospitalizing 9% more non-ACS patients without lowering the rate of missed ACS. Conclusion . Implementation of the AHCPR guideline did not improve triage decisions in emergency department patients with possible ACS. Assessing physician triage solely based on concordance with the AHCPR guideline may not accurately reflect the quality of patient care.

Keywords: practice guidelines; unstable angina; triage; emergency medical services; risk assessment; clinical trials (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2006
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X06295358 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:6:p:606-616

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06295358

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().