Cancer pain management in the emergency department: a multicenter prospective observational trial of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN).

PURPOSE: Many patients with cancer seek care for pain in the emergency department (ED). Prospective research on cancer pain in this setting has historically been insufficient. We conducted this study to describe the reported pain among cancer patients presenting to the ED, how pain is managed, and how pain may be associated with clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study on adult patients with active cancer presenting to 18 EDs in the USA. We reported pain scores, response to medication, and analgesic utilization. We estimated the associations between pain severity, medication utilization, and the following outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, and ED disposition. RESULTS: The study population included 1075 participants. Those who received an opioid in the ED were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.88) and OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.17, 2.07)), respectively. Severe pain at ED presentation was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.05, 5.02), though this risk was attenuated when adjusting for clinical factors (most notably functional status). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe pain had a higher risk of mortality, which was attenuated when correcting for clinical characteristics. Those patients who required opioid analgesics in the ED were more likely to require admission and were more at risk of 30-day hospital readmission. Future efforts should focus on these at-risk groups, who may benefit from additional services including palliative care, hospice, or home-health services.

Naloxone provision to emergency department patients recognized as high-risk for opioid use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at increased risk for overdose and death. Clinical practice guidelines and professional organization policy statements recommend providing naloxone to patients at risk for overdose. We sought to characterize fidelity to naloxone practice recommendations in a cohort of Emergency Department (ED) patients in whom opioid use disorder was suspected by the treating physician. METHODS: This single-center cross-sectional study evaluated electronic health records from an urban academic ED with 73,000 annual encounters in a region with a high prevalence of OUD. Patients ≥18 years old with encounters from January 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019 were included if discharged from the ED and either administered buprenorphine in the ED or referred to outpatient substance use treatment. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of included patients provided naloxone (take-home or prescription). We used random effects multivariable logistic regression (accounting for multiple patient encounters) to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for receiving naloxone. RESULTS: Of 1036 eligible patient encounters, 320 resulted in naloxone provision (30.9%, 95% CI: 28.1-33.8). Naloxone provision occurred for 33.6% (95% CI 30.5-36.7) of 900 patients referred to outpatient substance use treatment without ED buprenorphine administration, 10.6% (95% CI 5.0-19.2) of 85 patients administered buprenorphine and not referred to outpatient substance use treatment, and 17.6% (95% CI 8.4-30.9) of 51 patients administered buprenorphine and referred to outpatient treatment. After controlling for age, sex, race, and prior provision of naloxone, the administration of buprenorphine was associated with a 94% lower odds (aOR = 0.06 [95% CI 0.011-0.33]) for naloxone provision compared to those only referred to outpatient treatment. CONCLUSION: A majority of ED patients who received an intervention targeted at OUD, in an ED where take-home naloxone is freely available, did not receive either take-home naloxone or a prescription for naloxone at discharge. Patients receiving buprenorphine were less likely to receive naloxone than patients only referred to outpatient treatment. These data suggest barriers other than recognition of potential OUD and naloxone availability impact provision of naloxone and argue for a treatment "bundle" as a conceptual model for care of ED patients with suspected OUD.

Validation of the Emergency Severity Index (Version 4) for the Triage of Adult Emergency Department Patients With Active Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with active cancer account for a growing percentage of all emergency department (ED) visits and have a unique set of risks related to their disease and its treatments. Effective triage for this population is fundamental to facilitating their emergency care. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the validity of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI; version 4) triage tool to predict ED-relevant outcomes among adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified analysis of the observational cohort established by the National Cancer Institute-supported Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network's multicenter (18 sites) study of ED visits by patients with active cancer (N = 1075). We used a series of χ2 tests for independence to relate ESI scores with 1) disposition, 2) ED resource use, 3) hospital length of stay, and 4) 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1008 subjects included in this analysis, the ESI distribution skewed heavily toward high acuity (>95% of subjects had an ESI level of 1, 2, or 3). ESI was significantly associated with patient disposition and ED resource use (p values < 0.05). No significant associations were observed between ESI and the non-ED based outcomes of hospital length of stay or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: ESI scores among ED patients with active cancer indicate higher acuity than the general ED population and are predictive of disposition and ED resource use. These findings show that the ESI is a valid triage tool for use in this population for outcomes directly relevant to ED care.

Emergency Department Prescription Opioids as an Initial Exposure Preceding Addiction.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Opioid abuse and overdose constitute an ongoing health emergency. Many presume opioids have little potential for iatrogenic addiction when used as directed, particularly in short courses, as is typical of the emergency department (ED) setting. We preliminarily explore the possibility that initial exposure to opioids by EDs could be related to subsequent opioid misuse. METHODS: This cross-sectional study surveyed a convenience sample of patients reporting heroin or nonmedical opioid use at an urban, academic ED. We estimated the proportion whose initial exposure to opioids was a legitimate medical prescription and the proportion of those prescriptions that came from an ED. Secondary measurements included the proportion of patients receiving nonopioid substances before initial opioid exposure, the source of opioids between initial exposure and onset of regular nonmedical use, and time from initial prescription to opioid use disorder. RESULTS: Of 59 subjects, 35 (59%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 47% to 71%) reported they were first exposed to opioids by a legitimate medical prescription, and for 10 of 35 (29%; 95% CI 16% to 45%), the prescription came from an ED. Most medically exposed subjects (28/35; 80%; 95% CI 65% to 91%) reported nonopioid substance use or treatment for nonopioid substance use disorders preceding the initial opioid exposure. Emergency providers were a source of opioids between exposure and onset of regular nonmedical use in 11 of 35 cases (31%; 95% CI 18% to 48%). Thirty-one of the 35 medically exposed subjects reported the time of onset of nonmedical use; median time from exposure to onset of nonmedical use was 6 months for use to get high (N=25; interquartile range [IQR] 2 to 36), 12 months for regular use to get high (N=24; IQR 2 to 36), 18 months for use to avoid withdrawal (N=26; IQR 2 to 38), and 24 months for regular use to avoid withdrawal (N=27; IQR 2 to 48). Eleven subjects (36%; 95% CI 21% to 53%) began nonmedical use within 2 months, and 9 of 11 (82%; 95% CI 53% to 96%) reported nonopioid substance use or treatment for alcohol abuse before initial opioid exposure. CONCLUSION: Although short-term opioid administration by emergency providers is unlikely to cause addiction by itself, ED opioid prescriptions may contribute to the development of addiction in some patients. There is an urgent need for further research to estimate long-term risks of short-course opioid therapy so that the risk of iatrogenic addiction can be appropriately balanced with the benefit of analgesia.

Toward understanding the difference between using patients or encounters in the accounting of emergency department utilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Descriptions of emergency department (ED) census often do not differentiate between patients and encounters, and there is no guidance about which unit of analysis is most appropriate. We explore differences between patient- and encounter-level accounting of ED utilization. METHODS: Data extracted from hospital databases were used to identify all registered patients at 3 different but geographically proximate EDs: urban academic, urban community, and suburban community. Data were available from 2000 to 2009 for the academic ED and for all 3 EDs from 2003 to 2007. For each ED, we calculated number of encounters, proportion of encounters for "annual new patients" (ie, not seen previously that year), and number of "new patients" (ie, not seen previously during study period). We also determined the annual number of encounters per patient for each ED. RESULTS: At the academic ED, there were 890,397 encounters involving 256,805 patients. Annual encounters (≈89,000) and patients (≈49,000) remained relatively stable over time. Patients were new in 36.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 35.8% to 36.4%) of year 2 encounters, 25.3% (95% CI 25.1% to 25.6%) of year 5 encounters, and 22.4% (95% CI 22.1% to 22.7%) of year 10 encounters. For community EDs, 50.9% (95% CI 50.4% to 51.5%) and 53.7% (95% CI 53.1% to 54.2%) were new in year 2, and by the fifth year, 35.0% (95% CI 34.5% to 35.5%) and 36.2% (95% CI 35.7% to 36.7%) were new. In the academic ED, 56% of patients had a single encounter during 5 years and less than 6% had more than 8 encounters during that period. In community EDs, 62% of patients had a single encounter during 5 years and less than 3% had more than 8 encounters overall. CONCLUSION: EDs provide care to a relatively static population, with truly new patients composing only a minority of encounters. Although multiple encounters per patient are common, highly frequent use occurs for only a minority of ED patients, and then only for a discrete period. Encounters and patients are not equivalent units of analysis, and policymakers and researchers should determine which is most appropriate for their decisionmaking.

Observation unit use among patients with cancer following emergency department visits: Results of a multicenter prospective cohort from CONCERN.

PURPOSE: Emergency department (ED) visits by patients with cancer frequently end in hospitalization. As concerns about ED and hospital crowding increase, observation unit care may be an important strategy to deliver safe and efficient treatment for eligible patients. In this investigation, we compared the prevalence and clinical characteristics of cancer patients who received observation unit care with those who were admitted to the hospital from the ED. METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with cancer presenting to an ED affiliated with one of 18 hospitals of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergency Research Network (CONCERN) between March 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. We compared patient characteristics with the prevalence of observation unit care usage, hospital admission, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 1051 enrolled patients, 596 (56.7%) were admitted as inpatients, and 72 (6.9%) were placed in an observation unit. For patients admitted as inpatients, 23.7% had a length of stay ≤2 days. The conversion rate from observation to inpatient was 17.1% (95% CI 14.6-19.4) among those receiving care in an observation unit. The average observation unit length of stay was 14.7 h. Patient factors associated ED disposition to observation unit care were female gender and low Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, the discrepancy between observation unit care use and short inpatient hospitalization may represent underutilization of this resource and a target for process change.

Characterization of older adults with cancer seeking acute emergency department care: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in care of older adults in cancer treatment trials and emergency department (ED) use exist. This report provides a baseline description of older adults ≥65 years old who present to the ED with active cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network observational ED cohort study sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. Of 1564 eligible adults with active cancer, 1075 patients were prospectively enrolled, of which 505 were ≥ 65 years old. We recruited this convenience sample from eighteen participating sites across the United States between February 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. RESULTS: Compared to cancer patients younger than 65 years of age, older adults were more likely to be transported to the ED by emergency medical services, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and be admitted despite no significant difference in acuity as measured by the Emergency Severity Index. Despite the higher admission rate, no significant difference was noted in hospitalization length of stay, 30-day mortality, ED revisit or hospital admission within 30 days after the index visit. Three of the top five ED diagnoses for older adults were symptom-related (fever of other and unknown origin, abdominal and pelvic pain, and pain in throat and chest). Despite this, older adults were less likely to report symptoms and less likely to receive symptomatic treatment for pain and nausea than the younger comparison group. Both younger and older adults reported a higher symptom burden on the patient reported Condensed Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale than to ED providers. When treating suspected infection, no differences were noted in regard to administration of antibiotics in the ED, admissions, or length of stay ≤2 days for those receiving ED antibiotics. DISCUSSION: We identified several differences between older (≥65 years old) and younger adults with active cancer seeking emergency care. Older adults frequently presented for symptom-related diagnoses but received fewer symptomatic interventions in the ED suggesting that important opportunities to improve the care of older adults with cancer in the ED exist.

Palliative Care Needs and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Cancer in the Emergency Department.

Background: Older adults with cancer use the emergency department (ED) for acute concerns. Objectives: Characterize the palliative care needs and clinical outcomes of advanced cancer patients in the ED. Design: A planned secondary data analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN) data. Settings/Subjects: Cancer patients who presented to the 18 CONCERN affiliated EDs in the United States. Measurements: Survey included demographics, cancer type, functional status, symptom burden, palliative and hospice care enrollment, and advance directive code status. Results: Of the total (674/1075, 62.3%) patients had advanced cancer and most were White (78.6%) and female (50.3%); median age was 64 (interquartile range 54-71) years. A small proportion of them were receiving palliative (6.5% [95% confidence interval; CI 3.0-7.6]; p = 0.005) and hospice (1.3% [95% CI 1.0-3.2]; p = 0.52) care and had a higher 30-day mortality rate (8.3%, [95% CI 6.2-10.4]). Conclusions: Patients with advanced cancer continue to present to the ED despite recommendations for early delivery of palliative care.

A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing central laboratory and point-of-care cardiac marker testing strategies: the Disposition Impacted by Serial Point of Care Markers in Acute Coronary Syndromes (DISPO-ACS) trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care testing reduces time to cardiac marker results in patients evaluated for acute coronary syndromes, yet evidence this translates to a decreased length of stay is lacking. We hypothesized that point-of-care testing decreases length of stay in patients being evaluated for acute coronary syndromes in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Patients being evaluated for possible acute coronary syndromes at 4 EDs in the United States were randomized to having point-of-care markers as well as central laboratory markers, or central laboratory markers only (laboratory arm). Point-of-care markers were obtained using early serial testing at presentation and at 90, 180, and 360 minutes as required by the treating physician. Evaluation, treatment, and disposition decisions were at the treating physician's discretion. Length of stay was from presentation to the time of departure from the ED, either to an inpatient setting or to home. RESULTS: There were 1,000 patients in each study arm. There were 520 patients discharged home from the ED. Median (interquartile range) time to discharge home was 4.6 hours (3.5 to 6.1 hours) in laboratory patients and 4.5 hours (3.5 to 6.1 hours) in point-of-care patients. Median (interquartile range) time to transfer to an inpatient setting for admitted patients was 5.5 hours (4.2 to 7.5 hours) in laboratory patients, and 5.4 hours (4.1 to 7.3 hours) in point-of-care patients. At one site, time to transfer to the floor was reduced in the point-of-care arm compared with the laboratory arm (difference in medians 0.45 hours; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.14 to 1.04 hours). At one site, time to ED departure for discharged patients was higher in the point-of-care arm than the laboratory arm (difference in medians 1.25 hours; 95% CI 0.13 to 2.36 hours). CONCLUSION: The effect of point-of-care testing on length of stay in the ED varies between settings. At one site, point-of-care testing decreased time to admission, whereas at another, point-of-care testing increased time to discharge. Potential effects of point-of-care testing on patient throughput should be considered in the full context of ED operations.

Analysis of Diagnoses, Symptoms, Medications, and Admissions Among Patients With Cancer Presenting to Emergency Departments.

Importance: Better understanding of the emergency care needs of patients with cancer will inform outpatient and emergency department (ED) management. Objective: To provide a benchmark description of patients who present to the ED with active cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 18 EDs affiliated with the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN). Of 1564 eligible patients, 1075 adults with active cancer were included from February 1, 2016, through January 30, 2017. Data were analyzed from February 1 through August 1, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients reporting symptoms (eg, pain, nausea) before and during the ED visit, ED and outpatient medications, most common diagnoses, and suspected infection as indicated by ED antibiotic administration. The proportions observed, admitted, and with a hospital length of stay (LOS) of no more than 2 days were identified. Results: Of 1075 participants, mean (SD) age was 62 (14) years, and 51.8% were female. Seven hundred ninety-four participants (73.9%; 95% CI, 71.1%-76.5%) had undergone cancer treatment in the preceding 30 days; 674 (62.7%; 95% CI, 59.7%-65.6%) had advanced or metastatic cancer; and 505 (47.0%; 95% CI, 43.9%-50.0%) were 65 years or older. The 5 most common ED diagnoses were symptom related. Of all participants, 82 (7.6%; 95% CI, 6.1%-9.4%) were placed in observation and 615 (57.2%; 95% CI, 54.2%-60.2%) were admitted; 154 of 615 admissions (25.0%; 95% CI, 21.7%-28.7%) had an LOS of 2 days or less (median, 3 days; interquartile range, 2-6 days). Pain during the ED visit was present in 668 patients (62.1%; 95% CI, 59.2%-65.0%; mean [SD] pain score, 6.4 [2.6] of 10.0) and in 776 (72.2%) during the prior week. Opioids were administered in the ED to 228 of 386 patients (59.1%; 95% CI, 18.8%-23.8%) with moderate to severe ED pain. Outpatient opioids were prescribed to 368 patients (47.4%; 95% CI, 3.14%-37.2%) of those with pre-ED pain, including 244 of 428 (57.0%; 95% CI, 52.2%-61.8%) who reported quite a bit or very much pain. Nausea in the ED was present in 336 (31.3%; 95% CI, 28.5%-34.1%); of these, 160 (47.6%; 95% CI, 12.8%-17.1%) received antiemetics in the ED. Antibiotics were administered in the ED to 285 patients (26.5%; 95% CI, 23.9%-29.2%). Of these, 209 patients (73.3%; 95% CI, 17.1%-21.9%) were admitted compared with 427 of 790 (54.1%; 95% CI, 50.5%-57.6%) not receiving antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance: This initial prospective, multicenter study profiling patients with cancer who were treated in the ED identifies common characteristics in this patient population and suggests opportunities to optimize care before, during, and after the ED visit. Improvement requires collaboration between specialists and emergency physicians optimizing ED use, improving symptom control, avoiding unnecessary hospitalizations, and appropriately stratifying risk to ensure safe ED treatment and disposition of patients with cancer.

Fluoroquinolone resistance during 2000-2005: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Moxifloxacin is a respiratory fluoroquinolone with a community acquired pneumonia indication. Unlike other fluoroquinolones used in our healthcare system, moxifloxacin's urinary excretion is low and thus we hypothesized that increased use of moxifloxacin is associated with an increase in fluoroquinolone resistance amongst gram negative uropathogens. METHODS: All antibiograms for Gram negative bacteria were obtained for 2000 to 2005. The defined daily dose (DDD) for each fluoroquinolone was computed according to World Health Organization criteria. To account for fluctuation in patient volume, DDD/1000 bed days was computed for each year of study. Association between DDD/1000 bed days for each fluoroquinolone and the susceptibility of Gram negative bacteria to ciprofloxacin was assessed using Pearson's Correlation Coefficient, r. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 48,261 antibiograms, 347,931 DDD of fluoroquinolones, and 1,943,338 bed days. Use of fluoroquinolones among inpatients decreased from 237.2 DDD/1000 bed days in 2000 to 115.2 DDD/1000 bed days in 2005. With the exception of Enterobacter aerogenes, moxifloxacin use was negatively correlated with sensitivity among all 13 Gram negative species evaluated (r = -0.07 to -0.97). When the sensitivities of all Gram negative organisms were aggregated, all fluoroquinolones except moxifloxacin were associated with increased sensitivity (r = 0.486 to 1.000) while moxifloxacin was associated with decreased sensitivity (r = -0.464). CONCLUSION: Moxifloxacin, while indicated for empiric treatment of community acquired pneumonia, may have important negative influence on local antibiotic sensitivities amongst Gram negative organisms. This effect was not shared by other commonly used members of the fluoroquinolone class.

Patients who use multiple EDs: quantifying the degree of overlap between ED populations.

INTRODUCTION: The degree to which individual patients use multiple emergency departments (EDs) is not well-characterized. We determined the degree of overlap in ED population between three geographically proximate hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study reviewed administrative hospital records from 2003 to 2007 for patients registered to receive ED services at an urban academic, urban community, and suburban community ED located within 10 miles of one another. We determined the proportion who sought care at multiple EDs and secondarily characterized patterns of repeat encounters. RESULTS: There were 795,176 encounters involving 282,903 patients. There were 89,776 (31%) patients with multiple encounters to a single ED and 39,920 (14%) patients who sought care from multiple EDs. The 39,920 patients who sought care from multiple EDs generated 185,629 (23%) of all encounters. Patients with repeat encounters involving multiple EDs were more likely to be frequent or highly frequent users (30%) than patients with multiple encounters to a single ED (14%). CONCLUSION: While only 14% of patients received care from more than one ED, they were responsible for a quarter of ED encounters. Patients who use multiple EDs are more often frequent or highly frequent users than are repeat ED visitors to the same ED. Overlap between ED populations is sufficient to warrant consideration by multiple domains of research, practice, and policy.

Predictors of 30-day cardiovascular events in patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVES: Risk stratification of patients with potential acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is difficult. Patients with prior revascularization are considered higher risk, but they can also have symptoms from noncardiac causes. This study evaluated whether the presenting clinical characteristics were predictive of an increased risk of 30-day cardiovascular events in patients with prior revascularization presenting to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of potential ACS. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the DISPO-ACS study, a 2000-patient, four-site, randomized controlled trial of patients presenting with potential ACS. Process outcomes were evaluated using point-of-care cardiac markers compared to standard laboratory-based markers. Data included demographics, history, presenting symptoms, laboratory and electrocardiogram (ECG) results, hospital course, and 30-day cardiovascular events (death, acute myocardial infarction [AMI], revascularization). The association between presenting characteristics and 30-day cardiovascular events was assessed using univariable analysis and logistic regression; odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are given. RESULTS: Of 2,000 patients enrolled, 611 had prior revascularization (538 percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], 232 coronary artery bypass graft [CABG], 159 both). The mean (±SD) age was 66 (±14) years, 44% were female, and 22% were black. By 30 days, 101 patients (17%) had cardiovascular events (81 during the index visit, 20 during follow-up). There were four deaths, 28 AMIs, and 67 revascularizations within 30 days; 20 patients had multiple endpoints. Being male (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.07 to 2.62) or nonblack (OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.07 to 3.56) or having a family history of coronary artery disease (CAD; OR = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.32 to 3.3), elevated lipids (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.04 to 2.82), prior AMI (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.16 to 2.76), abnormal ECG on arrival (OR = 2.1, 95% CI = 1.33 to 3.34), and a positive initial troponin (OR = 14.7, 95% CI = 6.8 to 32.2) were predictive of cardiovascular events. The multivariable model found family history of CAD (OR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.26 to 3.36), abnormal initial ECG (OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.16 to 3.09), and positive initial troponin (OR = 13.3, 95% CI = 5.9 to 29.6) remained predictive of 30-day cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with prior revascularization, the initial ECG and early cardiac marker elevations, but not clinical presentation, predict odds of 30-day death, AMI, or revascularization.

Changes in cardiac troponin T measurements are associated with adverse cardiac events in patients with chronic kidney disease.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether long-term and short-term changes in cardiac troponin T (cTnT) were associated with adverse cardiac events (ACEs) in patients with chronic kidney disease. Long-term changes were defined as changes in cTnT between ED visits, and short-term changes were defined as changes between 2 consecutive serial cTnT measurements within an ED visit. A retrospective chart review of patients with chronic kidney disease with suspected acute coronary syndromes presenting to the ED between December 1999 and November 2003 was conducted. The primary outcome variable was an ACE which was a composite endpoint consisting of a discharge diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, revascularization, cardiac dysrhythmias, all-cause mortality, or congestive heart failure exacerbation. The primary predictor of ACE abstracted from the charts was the initial cTnT measured during each ED presentation. There were 90 patients with 397 visits enrolled in the study. Using a mixed-models analysis of variance, cTnT was higher in the ACE group than in the non-ACE group (difference in log cTnT = 0.054, 95% CI 0.006-0.101) after adjusting for age, race, sex, dialysis status, and smoking history. No other variables were found to be associated with cTnT. To evaluate the clinical significance of acute changes in cTnT, a secondary analysis was performed on 64 patients with an initial cTnT measurement above 0.10 ng/mL. For in-hospital and 30-day ACE, a short-term increase in cTnT of 0.11 ng/mL had a positive likelihood ratio of 13.3 and 11.9, respectively. Long-term and short-term increases in cTnT are associated with an ACE.