ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2024
Is rapid acute coronary syndrome evaluation with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin less costly? An economic evaluation.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Care Resource Utilization for Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction: A Secondary Analysis of the RACE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Clinical and Economic Implications of High-Sensitivity Troponin-Informed Admission Strategies in Non-AMI Chest Pain.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- The Role of Triglyceride/HDL Ratio, Triglyceride-Glucose Index, and Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value in the Differential Diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome and Predicting Mortality.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Is rapid acute coronary syndrome evaluation with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin less costly? An economic evaluation.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Protocols to evaluate for myocardial infarction (MI) using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) have the potential to drive costs upward due to the added sensitivity. We performed an economic evaluation of an accelerated protocol (AP) to evaluate for MI using hs-cTn to identify changes in costs of treatment and length of stay compared with conventional testing. Methods: We performed a planned secondary economic analysis of a large, cluster randomized trial across nine emergency departments (EDs) from July 2020 to April 2021. Patients were included if they were 18 years or older with clinical suspicion for MI. In the AP, patients could be discharged without further testing at 0 h if they had a hs-cTnI < 4 ng/L and at 1 h if the initial value were 4 ng/L and the 1-h value ≤7 ng/L. Patients in the standard of care (SC) protocol used conventional cTn testing at 0 and 3 h. The primary outcome was the total cost of treatment, and the secondary outcome was ED length of stay. Results: Among 32,450 included patients, an AP had no significant differences in cost (+$89, CI: -$714, $893 hospital cost, +$362, CI: -$414, $1138 health system cost) or ED length of stay (+46, CI: -28, 120 min) compared with the SC protocol. In lower acuity, free-standing EDs, patients under the AP experienced shorter length of stay (-37 min, CI: -62, 12 min) and reduced health system cost (-$112, CI: -$250, $25). Conclusion: Overall, the implementation of AP using hs-cTn does not result in higher costs.
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.