ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2026
Scalable regionalised quality improvement model for ACS management in resource-limited primary healthcare facilities.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 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
backgroundPrehospital delays remain critical barriers to timely acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care, particularly for patients referred from resource-constrained primary healthcare to hospitals with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capabilities. This study evaluated the associations between China Chest Pain Unit (CPU) programme, with prehospital delays, management and in-hospital outcomes for ACS patients.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study used registry data from the Chinese Cardiovascular Association Database. We included patients diagnosed with ACS who were referred from primary healthcare facilities to chest pain centres (CPCs). The CPU-referral group received standardised triage and referral protocols; the non-CPU-referral group received routine referral. All patients were treated at CPCs. Primary outcomes included in-hospital heart failure, in-hospital mortality, door-in-door-out (DIDO) time and time from onset to CPC door. Secondary outcomes included time from onset to first medical contact, door-to-balloon time, discharge medication use, length of stay and total hospital expenditure. Propensity score matching and generalised linear mixed models were used to evaluate the associations.
resultsA cohort consisting of 8834 patients was constructed by propensity score matching among 119 723 eligible referred ACS patients (5000 CPU-referrals and 114 723 non-CPU-referrals). CPU referral was associated with lower odds of in-hospital heart failure (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.92), shorter DIDO time (β=-0.33, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.25) and shorter times from onset to arrival at the CPC door (β=-0.19, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.11). CPU referral was also associated with shorter time to first medical contact and door-to-balloon time, improved adherence to guideline-recommended discharge medications, reduced length of stay and lower total hospital expenditure.
conclusionsThe regionalised quality improvement programme for CPUs was associated with reduced prehospital delays, lower in-hospital heart failure and mortality, better care quality and lower costs among referred ACS patients.
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.