ArticleOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2016
Acute chest pain fast track at the emergency department: who was misdiagnosed for acute coronary syndrome?
Article in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Effect of Thai Massage on the Severity of Pain in Patients with Unstable Angina: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of caring sciences · 2023Article
- An observational study of the occurrence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) among jordanian patients: Identifying the influence of Ramadan Fasting.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a commonly treated disease in the emergency department (ED). Acute chest pain is a common presenting symptom of ACS. Acute chest pain fast track (ACPFT) is a triage to cover patients presenting with chest pain with the aims of early detection and treatment for ACS. This study aimed to assess the quality of the ACPFT with the aim of improving the quality of care for ACS patients.
methodsThis study was conducted at the ED in Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. The inclusion criterion was patients presenting with acute chest pain at the ED. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all eligible patients. The primary outcomes of this study were to determine time from door to electrocardiogram and time from door to treatment (coronary angiogram with percutaneous coronary intervention or thrombolytic therapy in the case of ST elevation myocardial infarction). The outcome was compared between those who were in and not in the ACPFT.
resultsDuring the study period, there were 616 eligible patients who were divided into ACPFT (n=352 patients; 57.1%) and non-ACPFT (n=264 patients; 42.9%) groups. In the ACPFT group (n=352), 315 patients (89.5%) received an electrocardiogram within 10 minutes. The final diagnosis of ACS was made in 80 patients (22.7%) in the ACPFT group and 13 patients (4.9%) in the non-ACPFT group (
conclusionThe ACPFT at the ED facilitated the prompt work-ups and intervention for ACS.
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.