ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022
Cost effectiveness of a 1-hour high-sensitivity troponin-T protocol: An analysis of the RAPID-TnT trial.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and Economic Implications of High-Sensitivity Troponin-Informed Admission Strategies in Non-AMI Chest Pain.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Assays: From Implementation to Resource Utilization and Cost Effectiveness.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical Outcomes, Healthcare Utilization, and Cost Following Implementation of a High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin Assay.Clinical cardiology · 2025Article
- Cardiac Troponin as a Prognostic Indicator for Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Non-Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Clinical markers in heart failure: a narrative review.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo understand the economic impact of an accelerated 0/1-hour high-sensitivity troponin-T (hs-cTnT) protocol.
objectiveTo conduct a patient-level economic analysis of the RAPID-TnT randomised trial in patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
methodsAn economic evaluation was conducted with 3265 patients randomised to either the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (n = 1634) or the conventional 0/3-hour standard-of-care protocol (n = 1631) with costs reported in Australian dollars. The primary clinical outcome was all-cause mortality or new/recurrent myocardial infarction.
resultsOver 12-months, mean per patient costs were numerically higher in the 0/1-hour arm compared to the conventional 0/3-hour arm (by $472.49/patient, 95% confidence interval [95 %CI]: $-1,380.15 to $2,325.13, P = 0.617) with no statistically significant difference in primary outcome (0/1-hour: 62/1634 [3.8%], 0/3-hour: 82/1631 [5.0%], HR: 1.32 [95 %CI: 0.95-1.83], P = 0.100). The mean emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) was significantly lower in the 0/1-hour arm (by 0.62 h/patient, 95 %CI: 0.85 to 0.39, P < 0.001), but the subsequent 12-month unplanned inpatient costs was numerically higher (by $891.22/patient, 95 %CI: $-96.07 to 1,878.50, P = 0.077). Restricting the analysis to patients with hs-cTnT concentrations ≤ 29 ng/L, mean per patient cost remained numerically higher in the 0/1-hour arm (by $152.44/patient, 95 %CI:$-1,793.11 to $2,097.99, P = 0.988), whilst the reduction in ED LOS was more pronounced (by 0.70 h/patient, 95 %CI: 0.45-0.95, P < 0.001).
conclusionsThere were no differences in resource utilization between the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol versus the conventional 0/3-hour protocol for the assessment of suspected ACS, despite improved initial ED efficiency. Further refinements in strategies to improve clinical outcomes and subsequent management efficiency are needed.
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.