Diagnosing acute coronary syndrome in primary care: Comparison of the physicians' risk estimation and a clinical decision rule

Family Practice

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 323-328

  Bruins Slota, M H E ^a   Ruttena, F H ^a   van der Heijdena, G J M G ^a   Geersinga, G J ^a   Glatzb, J F C ^b   Hoesa, A W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cardiology; Clinical diagnosis

Indexed keywords

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; AGED; ANAMNESIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 79957454308     PISSN: 02632136     EISSN: 14602229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmq116     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Gencer B, Vaucher P, Herzig L et al. Ruling out coronary heart disease in primary care patients with chest pain: a clinical prediction score. BMC Med 2010; 8: 9.
2. Christenson J, Innes G, McKnight D, et al. Aclinical prediction rule for early discharge of patients with chest pain. Ann Emerg Med 2006; 47: 1-10.
3. Gatien M, Perry JJ, Stiell IG, Wielgosz A, Lee JS. A clinical decision rule to identify which chest pain patients can safely be removed from cardiac monitoring in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 50: 136-43.
4. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD et al. A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 1992; 21: 384-90.
5. Toll DB, Janssen KJ, Vergouwe Y, Moons KG. Validation, updating and impact of clinical prediction rules: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 1085-94.
6. Moons KG, Grobbee DE. Diagnostic studies as multivariable, prediction research. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002; 56: 337-8.
7. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005; 330: 765.
8. Stiell IG, McKnight RD, Greenberg GH et al. Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. JAMA 1994; 271: 827-32.
9. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 1999; 282: 1458-65.
10. Reilly BM, Evans AT. Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 201-9.
11. Bruins Slot MH, van der Heijden GJ, Rutten FH et al. Heart-type Fatty acid-binding protein in Acute Myocardial infarction Evaluation (FAME): background and design of a diagnostic study in primary care. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2008; 8: 8.
12. Grijseels EW, Deckers JW, Hoes AW et al. Implementation of a pre-hospital decision rule in general practice. Triage of patients with suspected myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 89-95.
13. Bassand JP, Hamm CW, Ardissino D et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 1598-660.
14. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 2173-95.
15. McNeil BJ, Hanley JA. Statistical approaches to the analysis of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Med Decis Making 1984; 4: 137-50.
16. Steyerberg EW, Vickers AJ, Cook NR et al. Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology 2010; 21: 128-38.
17. Hess EP, Thiruganasambandamoorthy V, Wells GA et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical prediction rules to exclude acute coronary syndrome in the emergency department setting: a systematic review. CJEM 2008; 10: 373-82.
18. Swap CJ, Nagurney JT. Value and limitations of chest pain history in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2005; 294: 2623-9.
19. Steyerberg EW, Bleeker SE, Moll HA, Grobbee DE, Moons KG. Internal and external validation of predictive models: a simulation study of bias and precision in small samples. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 441-7.