ArticleToxicology reports2021
The current practice for cocaine-associated chest pain in the Netherlands.
Article in Toxicology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of European Society of Cardiology guidelines for evaluating acute coronary syndrome risk in low-risk patients with cocaine-associated chest pain: Findings from the RISK study - An observational analysis.Toxicology reports · 2024Article
- Assessing the Potential of Untargeted SWATH Mass Spectrometry-Based Metabolomics to Differentiate Closely Related Exposures in Observational Studies.Metabolites · 2022Article
- Recreational drug use among young, hospitalized patients with acute coronary syndrome: A retrospective study.Toxicology reports · 2022Article
- Modified HEART score to optimize risk stratification in cocaine-associated chest pain.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCocaine is considered a cardiovascular risk factor, yet it is not included in the frequently used risk stratification scores. Moreover, many guidelines provide limited advice on how to diagnose and treat cocaine-associated chest pain (CACP). This study aimed to determine the current practice for CACP patients in emergency departments and coronary care units throughout the Netherlands.
methodsAn anonymous online questionnaire-based survey was conducted among Dutch emergency physicians and cardiologists between July 2015 and February 2016. The questionnaire was based on the American Heart Association CACP treatment algorithm.
resultsA total of 214 subjects were enrolled and completed the questionnaire. All responders considered cocaine use a risk factor for developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS), nevertheless 74.4 % of emergency physicians and 81.1 % of cardiologists do not always question chest pain patients about drug use. Of all responders, 73.6 % never perform toxicology screening. Most responders (60 %) observe patients with CACP according to the European Society of Cardiology ACS guideline, and 24.3 % give these patients ß-blockers.
conclusionThe current practice for CACP patients in most emergency departments and coronary care units in the Netherlands is not in line with the AHA scientific statement. Emergency physicians and cardiologists should be advised to routinely question all chest pain patients on drug history and be aware that the risk stratifications scores are not validated for CACP. Despite the AHA scientific statement of 2008, many respondents utilize ß-blockers for CACP patients, which is supported by published evidence since the statement appeared.
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.