ArticleEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Potential length of stay reductions from emergency department use of a point-of-care high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assay: Pilot findings from Australia's first cardiac emergency department.
Article in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare actual ED length of stay (LOS) using laboratory-based high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) testing with the potential LOS that could result from using point-of-care (POC) hs-cTnI tests.
methodsBaseline hs-cTnI tests were performed on the same blood sample in the laboratory (Access hsTnI assay) and in the ED (Atellica VTLi POC assay). Actual and potential LOS were compared for patients who were discharged after having a baseline laboratory hs-cTnI test only. Total LOS incorporated time from arrival to blood sample collection, blood sampling to result availability and result availability to discharge. For potential LOS, the blood sampling to result availability time with POC use was fixed at 10 min (2-min preparation and 8-min test-processing). The laboratory blood sampling to result availability time was from blood sample collection to result uploading on the pathology computer system. For the study, it was assumed that this was the only LOS component that would differ with POC use. Invalid POC result rates were monitored.
resultsFor 152 patients discharged after having a single baseline laboratory hs-cTnI test, the median actual LOS was 195 (interquartile range [IQR]: 152-319) min, which included a median laboratory blood-sampling-to-result-availability time of 48 (IQR: 41-59) min. The potential LOS from POC use was 157 (IQR: 103-282) min, which included the fixed 10-min blood-sampling-to-result-availability time. The mean actual-potential LOS difference was 43 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40-46) min. The POC invalid result rate was 11%.
conclusionThe Atellica VTLi could deliver a mean ED LOS reduction of 43-min per patient for those discharged after a single baseline hs-cTnI test. Use in actual practice and the invalid result rate require further evaluation.
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.