Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26509726›Full record

ArticleAdvanced emergency nursing journal

The Value of Continuous ST-Segment Monitoring in the Emergency Department.

Leonie Rose Bovino, Marjorie Funk, Michele M Pelter, Mayur M Desai, Vanessa Jefferson, Laura Kierol Andrews, Kenneth Forte

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced emergency nursing journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Cardiac Monitoring in the Emergency Department.Critical care nursing clinics of North America · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Leonie Rose BovinoYale School of Nursing, West Haven, Connecticut (Drs Bovino, Funk, Jefferson, and Andrews); Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut (Dr Desai); Emergency Department, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, Connecticut (Dr Bovino and Mr Forte); and University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) (Dr Pelter). Dr Bovino is now with the Quinnipiac University School of Nursing, Hamden, Connecticut.
Marjorie Funk
Michele M Pelter
Mayur M Desai
Vanessa Jefferson
Laura Kierol Andrews
Kenneth Forte
Dharmsinh Desai University · INForte (United States) · US

Funding

Research Training: Self and Family ManagementT32NR008346 · NINR · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GREY, MARGARET · 2003 to 2018
$4.7M
NINR NIH HHS T32 NR008346
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Practice standards for electrocardiographic monitoring recommend continuous ST-segment monitoring (C-STM) in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with signs and/or symptoms of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but few studies have evaluated its use in the ED. We compared time to diagnosis and 30-day adverse events before and after implementation of C-STM. We also evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of C-STM in detecting ischemia and infarction. We prospectively studied 163 adults (preintervention: n = 78; intervention: n = 85) in a single ED and stratified them into low (n = 51), intermediate (n = 100), or high (n = 12) risk using History, ECG, Age, Risk factors, and Troponin (HEART) scores. The principal investigator monitored participants, activating C-STM on bedside monitors in the intervention phase. We used likelihood ratios (LRs) as the measure of diagnostic accuracy. Overall, 9% of participants were diagnosed with ACS. Median time to diagnosis did not differ before and after implementation of C-STM (5.55 vs. 5.98 hr; p = 0.43). In risk-stratified analyses, no significant pre-/postdifference in time to diagnosis was found in low-, intermediate-, or high-risk participants. There was no difference in the rate of 30-day adverse events before versus after C-STM implementation (11.5% vs. 10.6%; p = 0.85). The +LR and -LR of C-STM for ischemia were 24.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4, 412.0) and 0.3 (95% CI: 0.02, 2.9), respectively, and for infarction were 13.7 (95% CI: 1.7, 112.3) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.3, 1.5), respectively. Use of C-STM did not provide added diagnostic benefit for patients with signs and/or symptoms of myocardial ischemia in the ED.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalAcute Coronary SyndromeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overElectrocardiographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificityUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26509726
PMCPMC4644066
OpenAlexW2468340108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.