Observational studyMilitary Medical Research2024
Effectiveness of chest pain center accreditation on the hospital outcome of acute aortic dissection: a nationwide study in China.
Observational study in Military Medical Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Histone Lactylation-Mediated Metabolic Remodeling in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells Aggravates Aortic Aneurysm and Dissection by Promoting Lactate Accumulation.Circulation · 2026Article
- Non-communicable disease burden in China, 1990-2023: Evidence from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023.Chinese medical journal · 2026Article
- Scoring architecture and transparency in healthcare accreditation: A scoping review of measurement design and signalling effects.SAGE open medicine · 2026Review
- Association between door-to-wire time and 30-day mortality after PCI in patients with acute myocardial infarction: evidence from a single-center study in the China chest pain center registry.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- AI-based diagnosis of acute aortic syndrome from noncontrast CT.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Transposition of an isolated left vertebral artery during aortic arch replacement for Stanford type A aortic dissection.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Aortic dissection disguised as musculoskeletal condition: a case report and review of literature.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe National Chest Pain Center Program (NCPCP) is a nationwide, quality enhancement program aimed at raising the standard of care for patients experiencing acute chest pain in China. The benefits of chest pain center (CPC) accreditation on acute coronary syndrome have been demonstrated. However, there is no evidence to indicate whether CPC accreditation improves outcomes for patients with acute aortic dissection (AAD).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study of patients with AAD from 1671 hospitals in China, using data from the NCPCP spanning the period from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2022. The patients were divided into 2 groups: pre-accreditation and post-accreditation admissions. The outcomes examined included in-hospital mortality, misdiagnosis, and Stanford type A AAD surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to explore the relationship between CPC accreditation and in-hospital outcomes. Furthermore, we stratified the hospitals based on their geographical location (Eastern/Central/Western regions) or administrative status (provincial/non-provincial capital areas) to assess the impact of CPC accreditation on AAD patients across various regions.
resultsThe analysis encompassed a total of 40,848 patients diagnosed with AAD. The post-accreditation group exhibited significantly lower rates of in-hospital mortality and misdiagnosis (12.1% vs. 16.3%, P < 0.001 and 2.9% vs. 5.4%, P < 0.001, respectively) as well as a notably higher rate of Stanford type A AAD surgery (61.1% vs. 42.1%, P < 0.001) compared with the pre-accreditation group. After adjusting for potential covariates, CPC accreditation was associated with substantially reduced risks of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.644, 95% CI 0.599-0.693) and misdiagnosis (adjusted OR 0.554, 95% CI 0.493-0.624), along with an increase in the proportion of patients undergoing Stanford type A AAD surgery (adjusted OR 1.973, 95% CI 1.797-2.165). Following CPC accreditation, there were significant reductions in in-hospital mortality across various regions, particularly in Western regions (from 21.5 to 14.1%). Moreover, CPC accreditation demonstrated a more pronounced impact on in-hospital mortality in non-provincial cities compared to provincial cities (adjusted OR 0.607 vs. 0.713).
conclusionCPC accreditation is correlated with improved management and in-hospital outcomes for patients with AAD.
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.