Use of echocardiography in outpatients with chest pain and normal resting electrocardiograms referred to Mayo Clinic Rochester.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how often unnecessary resting echocardiograms that are "not recommended" by clinical practice guidelines are performed in patients with stable chest pain and normal resting electrocardiograms (ECGs). BACKGROUND: There are scant data to indicate how often Class III recommendations are ignored in clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We searched electronically all medical records of referral outpatients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2013, to identify patients with stable chest pain and known or suspected coronary artery disease who underwent resting echocardiography and had normal resting ECGs and no other indication for echocardiography. RESULTS: Of the 15,529 referral outpatients who were evaluated at Mayo Clinic Rochester with chest pain, 3976 (25.6%) had resting echocardiograms. Eight hundred seventy of these 3976 patients (21.9%) had normal resting ECGs. Six hundred nineteen of these 870 patients (71.1%) had other indications for echocardiography. The remaining 251 patients (6.3% of all echocardiograms and 1.6% of all patients) had normal resting ECGs and no other indication for echocardiography. Two hundred thirty-nine of these 251 patients (95.2%) had normal echocardiograms. Of the 12 abnormal echocardiograms, only 4 led to any change in clinical management. Sixty-one of these 251 echocardiograms (24.3%) were "preordered" before the provider (physicians, nurses, physician assistants) visit. CONCLUSION: Echocardiograms were performed in 1 in 4 referral outpatients with chest pain seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester. However, only 1 in 16 of these echocardiograms was performed in violation of the class III recommendation in the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association guidelines for the management of stable angina. These unnecessary echocardiograms were almost always normal, and had little impact on clinical management. The rate of unnecessary echocardiograms could be decreased by eliminating preordering.

Appropriate use criteria for stress single-photon emission computed tomography sestamibi studies: a quality improvement project.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported the application of the 2005 American College of Cardiology Foundation appropriate use criteria for stress single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging to patients at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) in 2005 and 2006. A subsequent internal quality improvement project focused on physician education in an attempt to reduce the rate of inappropriate SPECT studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our 2008 physician education effort, focused on 4 specific indications that accounted for 88% of the inappropriate SPECT studies, included a presentation at medical grand rounds, a publication in the staff newsletter, meetings with physician administrators, and focused presentations to departments/divisions with many ordering physicians. We then remeasured the appropriateness of SPECT studies using previously published methods. The general categories of study indications, eg, after revascularization, were similar in 273 SPECT patients in 2008 and in our 2005 (n=284) and 2006 (n=284) cohorts. There was a trend suggesting a change in the overall classification of appropriateness over time (P=0.08) and a significant change in the rate of inappropriate studies over time (P=0.018). Inappropriate studies decreased from 14.4% in 2005 to 7.0% in 2006 before initiation of the quality improvement project. After completion of the quality improvement project, inappropriate studies increased to 11.7% (P=0.06). The 95% confidence limits for the 4.7% increase in inappropriate studies after the quality improvement project included a decrease of 0.2% and an increase of 9.6%. CONCLUSIONS: This quality improvement project, focused on feedback, physician education, and remeasurement, did not reduce the rate of inappropriate stress SPECT studies in a single academic medical center. Similar limited interventions focused on physician education alone may have limited benefit. More extensive intervention may be necessary to improve the quality of care with appropriateness criteria.

The impact of ordering provider specialty on appropriateness classification.

BACKGROUND: There is limited published data comparing the appropriateness use criteria for SPECT MPI with the specialty of the ordering provider. The aim of this study was to examine if the specialty of the ordering provider affected either the ordering indication or the appropriateness of stress SPECT MPI. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ordering provider's specialty was compared with the study indication and appropriateness rating. There were modest but significant differences in general indications by specialty. For example, the Emergency Department group ordered fewer studies in asymptomatic patients (3% compared to 14%-23% in the other four referral groups). In contrast, 43% of the studies ordered by Cardiovascular Division physicians and 39% of the studies ordered by the Registered Nurse group were on post-revascularization patients, compared to 23%-31% of those ordered by the other three groups. Overall appropriateness classification did not differ among the five specialty groups (P 5 0.19). CONCLUSION: In a clinical practice where pre-operative testing using SPECT is infrequent,the rate of inappropriate studies was similar for all ordering providers. Quality improvement efforts in similar practices will likely require a broad educational focus on all ordering providers.

Application of appropriateness criteria to stress single photon emission computed tomography sestamibi studies: a comparison of the 2009 revised appropriateness criteria to the 2005 original criteria.

BACKGROUND: The 2005 appropriate use criteria (AUC) for stress single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI) were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in published evidence, clinical practice and experience with application of the 2005 AUC. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2009 AUC for SPECT MPI with the original 2005 criteria. METHODS: Using the Mayo Rochester Nuclear Cardiology Laboratory database, we retrospectively examined 281 patients who underwent stress SPECT MPI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between May 1, 2005, and May 15, 2005, using the revised 2009 AUC and compared these findings to our previously published results in this same cohort using the 2005 AUC. RESULTS: Compared to the 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC resulted in a highly significant overall change (P < .001) in the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, reduced appropriate studies (59.8% vs 63.7%, P = .02), increased studies of uncertain appropriateness (16.0% vs 10.7%, P = .01), and increased inappropriate studies (24.2% vs 14.6%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients undergoing SPECT MPI, compared to our previous study using the original 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC had a significant impact on the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, increased inappropriate studies and increased studies of uncertain appropriateness.

Stress Testing in the Evaluation of Stable Chest Pain in a Community Population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of stress testing in a community population with de novo stable chest pain, a normal resting electrocardiogram (ECG), and the ability to exercise. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified eligible patients by searching the electronic medical record of all outpatients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2013. We determined the frequency of initial exercise stress testing, computed tomography coronary angiography, and invasive coronary angiography, as well as the use of subsequent second procedures (including percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] and coronary artery bypass grafting) within 90 days. Patients were followed for 5 years for death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: The data search identified 1175 patients with chest pain and normal resting ECGs. Only 331 patients underwent cardiac testing. A slight majority (185; 55.9%) underwent an exercise ECG alone. The remainder underwent exercise echocardiography (112; 33.8%), exercise single-photon-emission computed tomography (32; 9.7%), or computed tomography coronary angiography (2; 0.9%). Few patients (30; 9.1%) required additional testing within 90 days. Of the 14 patients (4.2%) who underwent invasive coronary angiography, 12 (85.7%) had significant coronary artery disease, and were referred for percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting. At 5 years, the mortality rate was 1.2%, and the combined event rate was 3.8%. CONCLUSION: Most community patients with chest pain and a normal resting ECG do not require further cardiac evaluation. In patients who require testing, and are able to exercise, noninvasive stress testing is preferred. Invasive coronary angiography is applied selectively and associated with a high rate of significant coronary artery disease and referral to coronary revascularization. Long-term outcomes are excellent.

Use of Echocardiography in Olmsted County Outpatients With Chest Pain and Normal Resting Electrocardiograms Seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how often unnecessary resting echocardiograms that are "not recommended" by clinical practice guidelines are performed in patients with stable chest pain and normal resting electrocardiograms (ECGs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective search of electronic medical records of all outpatients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2013, to identify residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, with stable chest pain and known or suspected coronary artery disease who underwent resting echocardiography and had normal resting ECGs and no other indication for echocardiography. RESULTS: Of the 8280 outpatients from Olmsted County who were evaluated at Mayo Clinic Rochester with chest pain, 590 (7.1%) had resting echocardiograms. Ninety-two of these 590 patients (15.6%) had normal resting ECGs. Thirty-three of these 92 patients (35.9%) had other indications for echocardiography. The remaining 59 patients (10.0% of all echocardiograms and 0.7% of all patients) had normal resting ECGs and no other indication for echocardiography. Fifty-seven of these 59 patients (96.6%) had normal echocardiograms. Thirteen of these 59 echocardiograms (22.0%) were "preordered" before the provider (physicians, nurses, physician assistants) visit. CONCLUSION: The overall rate of echocardiography in Olmsted County outpatients with chest pain seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester is low. Only 1 in 10 of these echocardiograms was performed in violation of the class III recommendation in the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association guidelines for the management of stable angina. These unnecessary echocardiograms were almost always normal. The rate of unnecessary echocardiograms could be decreased by eliminating preordering.

The timing and impact of follow-up studies after normal stress single-photon emission computed tomography sestamibi studies.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and timing of routine follow-up single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) studies after a normal stress SPECT scan compared with the patient's warranty period (ie, time to 1% risk of death or myocardial infarction). METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified patients at Mayo Clinic Rochester who had normal stress SPECT scans in 2002. Of 2354 patients without prior coronary artery disease, 309 (13%) had routine follow-up scans. The time to routine follow-up was a median of 2.1 years (25th percentile, 1.2 years; 75th percentile, 3.6 years). This interval was a median of 45% of the warranty period. Of the 309 patients, only 9 (3%) underwent subsequent coronary angiography, without revascularization. Of 656 patients with prior coronary artery disease, 171 (26%) had routine follow-up scans. The time to routine follow-up was a median of 1.6 years (25th percentile, 1.0 years; 75th percentile, 2.7 years). This interval was a median of 164% of the warranty period. Of the 171 patients, only 7 (4%) underwent coronary angiography, without revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: In patients without prior coronary artery disease, routine follow-up SPECT scans are performed infrequently but well before the end of the patient's warranty period. Routine follow-up scans are performed more commonly in patients with prior coronary artery disease but generally after the end of the warranty period. Routine follow-up SPECT scans have minimal impact on referral to catheterization or revascularization.