Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of accelerated diagnostic protocols for reducing emergency department length of stay in patients presenting with chest pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jesse Hill, N. Essel, Esther H. Yang, Liz Dennett, B. Rowe

PLoS ONE, 2024

404,566 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

In recent years, there has been an increase in the use of accelerated diagnostic protocols (ADPs) and high-sensitivity troponin assays (hsTn) for the assessment of chest pain in emergency departments (EDs). This study aimed to quantitatively summarize the operational and clinical outcomes of ADPs implemented for patients with suspected cardiac chest pain. To be considered eligible for inclusion, studies must have implemented some form of ADP within the ED for evaluating adult (age ≥18 years) patients presenting with chest pain using Tn assays. The primary outcome was ED length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients admitted and the proportion with 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Thirty-seven articles involving 404,566 patients met the inclusion criteria, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 32 observational studies. A significant reduction in total ED LOS was reported in 22 observational studies and four RCTs. Emergency departments with longer baseline ED LOS showed significantly larger reductions in LOS after ADP implementation. This observed association persisted after adjusting for both the change in serial Tn measurement interval and transition from conventional Tn assay to an hsTn assay (β = -0.26; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.10). Three studies reported an increase in the proportion of patients admitted after introducing an ADP, one of which was significant while 15 studies reported a significant decrease in admission…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 404,566 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free