15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The HEART score in predicting major adverse cardiac events in patients presenting to the emergency department with possible acute coronary syndrome: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a common, sometimes difficult to diagnose spectrum of diseases occurring after abrupt reduction in blood flow through a coronary artery. Given the diagnostic challenge, it is sensible for emergency physicians to have an approach to prognosticate patients with possible ACS. Multiple prediction models have been developed to help identify patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes. The HEART score is the first model to be derived, validated, and undergo clinical impact studies in emergency department (ED) patients with possible ACS.

          Objective

          To develop a protocol for a prognostic systematic review of the literature evaluating the HEART score as a predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients presenting to the ED with possible ACS.

          Methods/design

          This protocol is reported according to the PRISMA-P statement and is registered on PROSPERO. All methodological tools to be used are endorsed by the Cochrane Prognosis Methods Group. Pre-defined eligibility criteria are provided. Multiple strategies will be used to identify potentially relevant studies. Studies will be selected and data extracted using standardised forms based on the CHARMS checklist. The QUIPS tool will be used to assess the risk of bias within individual studies. Outcome measures will include prevalence, risk ratio, and absolute risk reduction for MACE within 6 weeks of ED evaluation, comparing HEART scores 0–3 versus 4–10. HEART score prognostic performance will be evaluated with the concordance (C) statistic (model discrimination), observed to expected events ratio (model calibration), and a decision curve analysis. Reporting biases and methodological, clinical, and statistical heterogeneity will be scrutinised. Unless deemed inappropriate, a meta-analysis and pre-defined subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed. Overall judgements about evidence quality and strength of recommendations will be summarised using the GRADE approach.

          Discussion

          This review will identify, select, and appraise studies evaluating the prognostic performance of the HEART score, producing results of interest to emergency physicians. These results may encourage shared clinical decision-making in the ED by facilitating risk communication with patients and health care providers.

          Systematic review registration

          PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017084400.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-018-0816-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Decision curve analysis.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            What is an acceptable risk of major adverse cardiac event in chest pain patients soon after discharge from the Emergency Department?: a clinical survey.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Development and validation of the Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score and 2 h accelerated diagnostic protocol.

              Risk scores and accelerated diagnostic protocols can identify chest pain patients with low risk of major adverse cardiac event who could be discharged early from the ED, saving time and costs. We aimed to derive and validate a chest pain score and accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADP) that could safely increase the proportion of patients suitable for early discharge. Logistic regression identified statistical predictors for major adverse cardiac events in a derivation cohort. Statistical coefficients were converted to whole numbers to create a score. Clinician feedback was used to improve the clinical plausibility and the usability of the final score (Emergency Department Assessment of Chest pain Score [EDACS]). EDACS was combined with electrocardiogram results and troponin results at 0 and 2 h to develop an ADP (EDACS-ADP). The score and EDACS-ADP were validated and tested for reproducibility in separate cohorts of patients. In the derivation (n = 1974) and validation (n = 608) cohorts, the EDACS-ADP classified 42.2% (sensitivity 99.0%, specificity 49.9%) and 51.3% (sensitivity 100.0%, specificity 59.0%) as low risk of major adverse cardiac events, respectively. The intra-class correlation coefficient for categorisation of patients as low risk was 0.87. The EDACS-ADP identified approximately half of the patients presenting to the ED with possible cardiac chest pain as having low risk of short-term major adverse cardiac events, with high sensitivity. This is a significant improvement on similar, previously reported protocols. The EDACS-ADP is reproducible and has the potential to make considerable cost reductions to health systems. © 2014 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                chris.byrne@mail.utoronto.ca
                cristian.toarta@mail.utoronto.ca
                backus@heartscore.nl
                tim.holt@phc.ox.ac.uk
                Journal
                Syst Rev
                Syst Rev
                Systematic Reviews
                BioMed Central (London )
                2046-4053
                2 October 2018
                2 October 2018
                2018
                : 7
                : 148
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2157 2938, GRID grid.17063.33, Department of Medicine, , University of Toronto, ; 190 Elizabeth Street, R. Fraser Elliot Building, Rm 3-805, Toronto, M5G 2C4 Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0396 792X, GRID grid.413972.a, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, ; Albert Schweitzerplaats 25, 3318 AT Dordrecht, Netherlands
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, GRID grid.4991.5, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, , Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, ; Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2289-8064
                Article
                816
                10.1186/s13643-018-0816-4
                6169026
                30285866
                e2604b19-3d9f-4708-acc5-349c06568ec4
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 27 February 2018
                : 13 September 2018
                Categories
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Public health
                emergency department,acute coronary syndrome,heart score,major adverse cardiac events,prognosis

                Comments

                Comment on this article