San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict short-term serious outcomes: A systematic review

CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal

Volumn 183, Issue 15, 2011, Pages

  Saccilotto, Ramon T ^a   Nickel, Christian H ^b   Bucher, Heiner C ^a   Steyerberg, Ewout W ^c   Bingisser, Roland ^b   Koller, Michael T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BASEL   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BASEL   (Switzerland)

^c NONE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; EMERGENCY WARD; HEART ARRHYTHMIA; HUMAN; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PREVALENCE; PROBABILITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAN FRANCISCO SYNCOPE RULE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STUDY DESIGN; SYNCOPE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 80054705211     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: 14882329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.101326     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Reed MJ, Newby DE, Coull AJ, et al. The Risk stratification Of Syncope in the Emergency department (ROSE) pilot study: a comparison of existing syncope guidelines. Emerg Med J 2007; 24:270-5. (Pubitemid 46614319)
2. Grossman SA, Fischer C, Kancharla A, et al. Can benign etiol - ogies predict benign outcomes in high-risk syncope patients? J Emerg Med 2011;40:592-7
3. Quinn JV, Stiell IG, McDermott DA, et al. Derivation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with short-term ser - ious outcomes. Ann Emerg Med 2004;43:224-32. (Pubitemid 38141466)
4. Quinn J, McDermott D, Stiell I, et al. Prospective validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with serious outcomes. Ann Emerg Med 2006;47:448-54.
5. Colivicchi F, Ammirati F, Melina D, et al. Development and prospective validation of a risk stratification system for patients with syncope in the emergency department: the OESIL risk score. Eur Heart J 2003;24:811-9. (Pubitemid 36528560)
6. Sun BC, Emond JA, Camargo CA Jr. Characteristics and admission patterns of patients presenting with syncope to U.S. emergency departments, 1992-2000. Acad Emerg Med 2004;11:1029-34. (Pubitemid 39243998)
7. Blanc JJ, L'Her C, Touiza A, et al. Prospective evaluation and outcome of patients admitted for syncope over a 1 year period. Eur Heart J 2002;23:815-20. (Pubitemid 35238496)
8. Díaz-Castro O, Puchol A, Almendral J, et al. Predictors of inhospital ventricular fibrillation or torsades de pointes in patients with acute symptomatic bradycardia. J Electrocardiol 2004; 37:55-60. (Pubitemid 38168830)
9. Wolfe TR, Allen TL. Syncope as an emergency department presentation of pulmonary embolism. J Emerg Med 1998;16:27-31. (Pubitemid 28087345)
10. Georgeson S, Linzer M, Griffith JL, et al. Acute cardiac ischemia in patients with syncope: importance of the initial electrocardiogram. J Gen Intern Med 1992;7:379-86.
11. Elesber AA, Decker WW, Smars PA, et al. Impact of the application of the American College of Emergency Physicians recommendations for the admission of patients with syncope on a retro spectively studied population presenting to the emergency department. Am Heart J 2005;149:826-31. (Pubitemid 40718877)
12. Quinn JV, Stiell IG, McDermott DA, et al. The San Francisco Syncope Rule vs physician judgment and decision making. Am J Emerg Med 2005;23:782-6. (Pubitemid 41354948)
13. Mendu ML, McAvay G, Lampert R, et al. Yield of diagnostic tests in evaluating syncopal episodes in older patients. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1299-305.
14. Grossman SA, Fischer C, Lipsitz LA, et al. Predicting adverse outcomes in syncope. J Emerg Med 2007;33:233-9. (Pubitemid 47633890)
15. Sun BC, Derose SF, Liang LJ, et al. Predictors of 30-day serious events in older patients with syncope. Ann Emerg Med 2009; 54: 769-78.
16. ReedMJ, Newby DE, Coull AJ, et al. The ROSE (risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:713-21.
17. Quinn J, McDermott D. ECG criteria of the San Francisco Syncope Rule [letter]. Ann Emerg Med 2011;57:72-3.
18. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, et al. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;10:25.
19. Whiting PF, Weswood ME, Rutjes AW, et al. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accur - acy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:9.
20. McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: How to use articles about clinical decision rules. JAMA 2000;284:79-84. (Pubitemid 30445665)
21. Stiell IG, Wells GA. Methodologic standards for the development of clinical decision rules in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33:437-47. (Pubitemid 29157570)
22. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007; 4:e297.
23. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AWS, et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:982-90. (Pubitemid 41316441)
24. Friedman J. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw 2010;33:1-22.
25. Fischer CM, Shapiro NI, Lipsitz LA, et al. External validation of the San Francisco syncope rule. Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12(Suppl):127.
26. Stracner DL, Kass LE. Validation of the San Francisco syncope rule. Acad Emerg Med 2005;12(Suppl):87-8.
27. Sun BC, Mangione CM, Merchant G, et al. External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule. Ann Emerg Med 2007; 49: 420-7.
28. Cosgriff TM, Kelly AM, Kerr D. External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule in the Australian context. CJEM 2007;9:157-61. (Pubitemid 46805464)
29. Birnbaum A, Esses D, Bijur P, et al. Failure to validate the San Francisco Syncope Rule in an independent emergency department population. Ann Emerg Med 2008;52:151-9.
30. Schladenhaufen R, Feilinger S, Pollack M, et al. Application of San Francisco Syncope Rule in elderly ED patients. Am J Emerg Med 2008;26:773-8.
31. Thiruganasambandamoorthy V, Hess EP, Alreesi A, et al. External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule in the Can - adian setting. Ann Emerg Med 2010;55:464-72.
32. Dipaola F, Costantino G, Perego F, et al. San Francisco Syncope Rule, Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio risk score, and clinical judgment in the assessment of short-term outcome of syncope. Am J Emerg Med 2010;28:432-9.
33. Serrano LA, Hess EP, Bellolio MF, et al. Accuracy and quality of clinical decision rules for syncope in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2010;56:362-73.e1.
34. Quinn J. Risk stratification of patients with syncope. CJEM 2007;9:174-5. (Pubitemid 46805467)
35. Miller CD, Hoekstra JW. Medical decisionmaking and the San Francisco syncope rule [letter]. Ann Emerg Med 2006;48:763.
36. Moya A, Sutton R, Ammirati F, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (version 2009): the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Syncope of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2009;30:2631-71.
37. Stockley CJ, Bonney ME, Gray AJ, et al. Syncope management in the UK and Republic of Ireland. Emerg Med J 2009; 26:331-3.
38. Brignole M, Menozzi C, Bartoletti A, et al. A new management of syncope: prospective systematic guideline-based evaluation of patients referred urgently to general hospitals. Eur Heart J 2006; 27:76-82. (Pubitemid 41785935)
39. American College of Emergency Physicians. Clinical policy: critical issues in the evaluation and management of patients presenting with syncope. Ann Emerg Med 2001;37:771-6.
40. Linzer M, Yang EH, Estes NA 3rd, et al. Diagnosing syncope. Part 1: Value of history, physical examination, and electrocardiography. Clinical Efficacy Assessment Project of the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:989-96.
41. Birnbaum A, Esses D. Response to "Failure to validate the San Francisco Syncope Rule in an independent emergency department population" [letter]. Ann Emerg Med 2009;53:693-4.
42. Quinn J, McDermott D. External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule. Ann Emerg Med 2007;50:742-3. (Pubitemid 350103852)
43. Sun BC, Mangione CM, Merchant G, et al. External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule. Ann Emerg Med 2007;49:420-7, 427.e1-4.
44. Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, et al. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:889-97.
45. Steurer J, Fischer JE, Bachmann LM, et al. Communicating accuracy of tests to general practitioners: a controlled study. BMJ 2002;324:824-6. (Pubitemid 34280735)
46. Bachmann LM, Steurer J, ter Riet G. Simple presentation of test accuracy may lead to inflated disease probabilities. BMJ 2003;326:393.