ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2024
Current ED syncope management in Italian hospitals and prospects for optimization: a national survey.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2024. 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.
- Syncope diagnostic evaluation in a southern European population: patterns of clinical practice and cost implications.BMC health services research · 2026Observational
- Syncope - mind the gap: it's time to build bridges in the UK.The British journal of cardiology · 2026Article
- Cardiac Geometry and Function in Patients with Reflex Syncope.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Recent Advances and Future Directions in Syncope Management: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate current ED management of patients with syncope in Italy and opportunities for optimization, we carried out a questionnaire survey involving 102 directors of ED facilities in our country, of any complexity level, with 55.9% located in the North, 97% equipped with an ED Observation Unit (EDOU), and 21.8% with an outpatient Syncope Unit (SU). 43.6% of EDs management is not standardized. Clinical judgment and monitoring are the main factors leading management while old age and neuropsychic comorbidities the most hindering it. More than one third of ED facilities treats fewer than half of patients in EDOU. Most of respondents (73.7%) reported an admission rate within 20%, primarily in cardiology, in the case of an established or suspected cardiac etiology of syncope. In most centers, the referral to the general practitioner is the priority path at discharge from ED. Nearly 50% of participants rated syncope management in their own center as sub-optimal. To optimize it, 98% of them believe that is appropriate to implement a standardized approach, with and a large majority focusing on increasing diagnostic yield and safety; other priorities include application of guidelines, implementation of care pathways, enhancement of the role of EDOU, and direct path to the SU. This study highlights that the management of syncope patients in our country requires a further improvement, especially through standardization of pathways and adoption of innovative organizational solutions. Admissions appear to be lower than reported in the literature but this finding must be confirmed by a multicentric study based on direct collection of data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37962787What 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.