Trial reportJAMA cardiology2022
Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients in Rural Australia: The MORACS Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- National Heart Foundation of Australia and Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand: Australian Clinical Guideline for Diagnosing and Managing Acute Coronary Syndromes 2025.The Medical journal of Australia · 2026Guideline
- Acceptability of Cardiovascular Disease Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered "Walking Hospitals": A Narrative Review of Innovative Models and Ecosystem Construction in Rural Healthcare.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Control Tower in the hospital: a structure-process-outcome systemic review of telemedicine systems for interprofessional collaboration.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- How Close Are We to Patient-Side Troponin Testing?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Rural-Urban Differences in Outcomes of Acute Cardiac Admissions in a Large Health Service.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in rural settings involves thrombolysis followed by transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospital. The first step is accurate diagnosis via electrocardiography (ECG), but one-third of all STEMI incidents go unrecognized and hence untreated. Objective: To reduce missed diagnoses of STEMI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial included 29 hospital emergency departments (EDs) in rural Australia with no emergency medicine specialists, which were randomized to usual care vs automatically triggered diagnostic support from the tertiary referral hospital (management of rural acute coronary syndromes [MORACS] intervention). Patients presenting with symptoms compatible with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) were eligible for inclusion. The study was conducted from December 2018 to April 2020. Data were analyzed in August 2021. Intervention: Triage of a patient with symptoms compatible with ACS triggered an automated notification to the tertiary hospital coronary care unit. The ECG and point-of-care troponin results were reviewed remotely and a phone call was made to the treating physician in the rural hospital to assist with diagnosis and initiation of treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients with missed STEMI diagnoses. Results: A total of 6249 patients were included in the study (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [12.2] years; 48% female). Of 7474 ED presentations with suspected ACS, STEMI accounted for 77 (2.0%) in usual care hospitals and 46 (1.3%) in MORACS hospitals. Missed diagnosis of STEMI occurred in 27 of 77 presentations (35%) in usual care hospitals and 0 of 46 (0%) in MORACS hospitals (P < .001). Of eligible patients, 48 of 75 (64%) in the usual care group and 36 of 36 (100%) in the MORACS group received primary reperfusion (P < .001). In the usual care group, 12-month mortality was 10.3% (n = 8) vs 6.5% (n = 3) in the MORACS group (relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.18-2.23). Patients with missed STEMI diagnoses had a mortality of 25.9% (n = 7) compared with 2.0% (n = 1) for those with accurately diagnosed STEMI (relative risk, 13.2; 95% CI, 1.71-102.00; P = .001). Overall, there were 6 patients who did not have STEMI as a final diagnosis; 5 had takotsubo cardiomyopathy and 1 had pericarditis. There was no difference between groups in the rate of alternative final diagnosis. Conclusion and Relevance: The findings indicate that MORACS diagnostic support service reduced the proportion of missed STEMI and improved the rates of primary reperfusion therapy. Accurate diagnosis of STEMI was associated with lower mortality. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12619000533190.
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.