ArticleEuropean heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care2012
Self-referral to chest pain units: results of the German CPU-registry.
Article in European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Criteria of the German Society of Cardiology for the establishment of chest pain units: update 2014.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2015Guideline
- Trial
- Effect of non-invasive rhythm control on outcomes in patients with first diagnosed atrial fibrillation presenting to an emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Article
- Unexpected high level of severe events even in low-risk profile chest pain unit patients.Herz · 2022Observational
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest pain units (CPUs) are increasingly established in emergency cardiology services. With improved visibility of CPUs in the population, patients may refer themselves directly to these units, obviating emergency medical services (EMS). Little is known about characteristics and outcomes of self-referred patients, as compared with those referred by EMS. Therefore, we described self-referral patients enrolled in the CPU-registry of the German Cardiac Society and compared them with those referred by EMS. METHODS AND
resultsFrom 2008 until 2010, the prospective CPU-registry enrolled 11,581 consecutive patients. Of those 3789 (32.7%) were self-referrals (SRs), while 7792 (67.3%) were referred by EMS. SR-patients were significantly younger (63.6 vs. 70.1 years), had less prior myocardial infarction or coronary artery bypass surgery, but more previous percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). Acute coronary syndromes were diagnosed less frequently in the SR-patients (30.3 vs. 46.9%; p<0.0001). SR-patients showed ST-segment changes in their initial ECG in 19.6% of cases. EMS-patients underwent more coronary angiographies (60.0 vs. 47.5%; p<0.0001), while SR-patients underwent more stress tests (11.3 vs. 7.8%; p<0.001). PCI was performed in 32.6% of the EMS- and in 24.0% of the SR-group (p<0.0001).
conclusionThese data demonstrate that patients who contact a CPU as a self-referral are younger, less severely ill and have more non-coronary problems than those calling an emergency medical service. Nevertheless, 30% of self-referral patients had an acute coronary syndrome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.