ReviewHerz2021
[Comparison between chest pain units and stroke units : Essential components of the vascular emergency care system: comparison of structure, certification process, quality benchmarking and reimbursement].
Review in Herz, 2021. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Acute Abdomen: Structured Diagnosis and Treatment.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Review
- [German Radiological Society and the Professional Association of German Radiologists position paper on coronary computed tomography: clinical evidence and quality of patient care in chronic coronary syndrome].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Capacity changes in German certified chest pain units during COVID-19 outbreak response.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest pain units (CPU) and stroke units (SU) have both become established as essential components of clinical emergency care. For both instances dedicated certification processes are installed. Up to summer 2020, 290 CPUs and 335 SUs have been successfully certified.
objectiveThe aim of this review is to compare the structures and the current certification situation of CPUs and SUs. Also, the younger CPU certification process is compared to the long established SU certification standard. MATERIAL UND
methodsThe comparison includes the historical background, the certification process, quality benchmarking, possible additive structures, the current status of certification in Germany, the transfer of the concept to the European level as well as reimbursement issues.
resultsBoth certification concepts show clear analogies. Evidence for SUs is supported by a positive Cochrane analysis and for CPUs there are many studies from the German CPU registry. The main differences include a uniform CPU system versus a multistep SU system of certification. Furthermore, SU have obligatory elements of quality documentation but only facultative quality indicator assessment for CPUs. From an economic viewpoint operation and procedural key (OPS) numbers guarantee a better reflection of the use of resources in the complex treatment of stroke, which could not yet be established for CPUs.
conclusionThe well-established CPU concept could additionally benefit from a superordinate quality control. Adequate quality benchmarking appears to be fundamental for gap analyses and for the establishment of a separate remuneration structure. In this respect the German Society for Cardiology as the certifying institution is required to establish an appropriate mechanism within the framework of regular updates of criteria.
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.