Rationale and design of a randomized trial comparing initial stress echocardiography versus coronary CT angiography in low-to-intermediate risk emergency department patients with chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has become a major focus of cardiovascular disease investigation to optimize diagnosis and treatment paradigms and decrease healthcare expenditures. Acute chest pain is a highly prevalent reason for evaluation in the Emergency Department (ED) that results in hospital admission for many patients and excess expense. Improvement in noninvasive diagnostic algorithms can potentially reduce unnecessary admissions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of treadmill stress echocardiography (SE) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) in ED chest pain patients with low-to-intermediate risk of significant coronary artery disease. DESIGN: This is a single-center, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing SE and CTA head-to-head as the initial noninvasive imaging modality. The primary outcome measured is the incidence of hospitalization. The study is powered to detect a reduction in admissions from 28% to 15% with a sample size of 400. Secondary outcomes include length of stay in the ED/hospital and estimated cost of care. Safety outcomes include subsequent visits to the ED and hospitalizations, as well as major adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days and 1 year. Patients who do not meet study criteria or do not consent for randomization are offered entry into an observational registry. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT will add to our understanding of the roles of different imaging modalities in triaging patients with suspected angina. It will increase the CER evidence base comparing SE and CTA and provide insight into potential benefits and limitations of appropriate use of treadmill SE in the ED.

Comparison Between Anatomical and Functional Imaging Modalities for Evaluation of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department.

Evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED) frequently employs a noninvasive strategy, including coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress echocardiography (SE), or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). We sought to report the real-world experience of utilizing CCTA compared with SE and MPI at an urban hospital ED. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutively enrolled patients presenting with chest pain who had normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG), negative initial troponin-T, at least intermediate risk based on modified Diamond-Forrester criteria, and who underwent CCTA, SE, or MPI based on their individual test eligibility criteria. The primary outcome was ED discharge time. Secondary outcomes included test utilization and 30-days rehospitalization rates. The 2,143 patients who were included (mean age was 56 ± 12 years; 55% women) utilization rate (test performed/eligible) was lower for CCTA (n = 354/1,329) and MPI (n = 530/1,435) compared with SE (n = 1,259/1,650), p <0.001. Mean ED discharge times for both CCTA and SE were 12.5 ± 7.4 versus 16 ± 7.3 hours for MPI (p <0.0001). Patients with SE and CCTA were less likely to undergo coronary angiography (29%, 25%, vs 52% for MPI). There was a 1% cardiac-related 30-days rehospitalization rate in the CCTA group versus 1% in SE and 3% in the MPI group (p <0.01). In conclusion, CCTA and SE were associated with faster ED discharge and lower frequency of diagnostic coronary angiography. Notwithstanding its clinical utility, CCTA was underutilized at our large urban ED setting.

Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Versus Stress Echocardiography in Acute Chest Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare early emergency department (ED) use of coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) and stress echocardiography (SE) head-to-head. BACKGROUND: Coronary CTA has been promoted as the early ED chest pain triage imaging method of choice, whereas SE is often overlooked in this setting and involves no ionizing radiation. METHODS: The authors randomized 400 consecutive low- to intermediate-risk ED acute chest pain patients without known coronary artery disease and a negative initial serum troponin level to immediate coronary CTA (n = 201) or SE (n = 199). The primary endpoint was hospitalization rate. Secondary endpoints were ED and hospital length of stay. Safety endpoints included cardiovascular events and radiation exposure. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 55 years, with 43% women and predominantly ethnic minorities (46% Hispanics, 32% African Americans). Thirty-nine coronary CTA patients (19%) and 22 SE patients (11%) were hospitalized at presentation (difference 8%; 95% confidence interval: 1% to 15%; p = 0.026). Median ED length of stay for discharged patients was 5.4 h (interquartile range [IQR]: 4.2 to 6.4 h) for coronary CTA and 4.7 h (IQR: 3.5 to 6.0 h) for SE (p < 0.001). Median hospital length of stay was 58 h (IQR: 50 to 102 h) for coronary CTA and 34 h (IQR: 31 to 54 h) for SE (p = 0.002). There were 11 and 7 major adverse cardiovascular events for coronary CTA and SE, respectively (p = 0.47), over a median 24 months of follow-up. Median/mean complete initial work-up radiation exposure was 6.5/7.7 mSv for coronary CTA and 0/0.96 mSv for SE (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of SE resulted in the hospitalization of a smaller proportion of patients with a shorter length of stay than coronary CTA and was safe. SE should be considered an appropriate option for ED chest pain triage (Stress Echocardiography and Heart Computed Tomography [CT] Scan in Emergency Department Patients With Chest Pain; NCT01384448).

Using smartphones to improve interdisciplinary collaboration.

Most individuals in the United States have access to and use smartphones to facilitate effective collaboration. Health information technology is invaluable to the improvement of collaboration and communication in the healthcare setting. The versatile nature of technology has demonstrated that healthcare professionals are dependent on its use. Smartphones play a key role in keeping interdisciplinary team members connected.

The effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration for adult home hospice patients on patient satisfaction and hospital admissions and re-admissions: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction and hospital re-admission rates are the two major outcomes for measuring quality of healthcare delivery. Interdisciplinary collaboration, a concept that describes coordination of care between multiple healthcare professionals and patients and families to deliver the highest quality of care across settings, is fundamental to improving patient outcomes. Home hospice care is palliative in nature and is a critical segment of patient care. To date, no systematic review has been undertaken to determine the effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration in the home hospice setting in relation to patient satisfaction and hospital readmission. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the review was to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration on patient satisfaction and hospital admission and re-admission rates for adults receiving home hospice services. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Adults, male and female (18 years old or older), receiving home hospice services or transitioning from hospital to home hospice servicesThe studies that evaluate interdisciplinary collaboration among the hospice team providing home hospice services in the home care settingsIn this review, randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were considered for inclusion.Patient satisfaction and all cause hospital admissions and re-admission rates. SEARCH STRATEGY: Published and unpublished literature in the English language was sought from the inception of the databases through August 15, 2014. The databases searched included: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Nursing & Allied Health Source, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition and ProQuest Health Management. A search of grey literature and any relevant homecare/hospice websites was also performed. RESULTS: There were no studies located that met the inclusion requirements of this review. There were no text or opinion pieces that were specific to structured interdisciplinary collaboration among the hospice team in home care settings on patient satisfaction and hospital readmission. CONCLUSION: There is currently no evidence available to determine the effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration among hospice teams in home care settings in regard to patient satisfaction and hospital readmission. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: No conclusive recommendations can be made regarding the effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration among home hospice teams in home care settings in regard to patient satisfaction and hospital readmission. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Quantitative and qualitative research studies are urgently required to determine the effectiveness of structured interdisciplinary collaboration among home hospice teams in home care settings in regard to patient satisfaction and hospital readmission.