Observational studyMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2026
[Emergency physician interventions in the care of patients with acute coronary syndrome : Comparative, retrospective, observational study].
Observational study in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prehospital emergency care of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is highly relevant as such interventions have required an above-average involvement of emergency physicians to date. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of physicians' interventions in the context of ACS care and to identify predictors that indicate the need for such interventions at the time of the emergency call.
methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted based on 10,833 emergency department protocols from three regions in Germany. Protocols with (suspected) diagnoses such as STEMI, NSTEMI, unclear chest pain, or cardiogenic shock were included. After extensive data cleaning and coding of interventions, a descriptive analysis was performed to determine the incidence of physicians' measures and a logistic regression to determine predictors for physicians' interventions.
resultsInterventions requiring the presence of an emergency physician were performed in 2.5% of cases. Significant predictors for physicians' interventions were undocumented (odds ratio [OR] 2.7), reduced (OR 7.77) or absent consciousness (OR 24.5), undocumented breathing (OR 5.13), dyspnea (OR 2.1), cyanosis (OR 4.48), apnea (OR 8.82) or cold sweats (OR 3.2).
conclusionThe incidence of physicians' interventions in ACS patients is low. The results suggest that not all ACS cases require physicians on scene. However, patients with reduced consciousness, cyanosis or respiratory arrest should continue to be treated primarily by emergency physicians. Prospective studies could further improve prehospital care.
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.