Search

The History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, Troponin (HEART) score is a useful tool in the Emergency Department setting to identify those patients safe for outpatient evaluation of chest pain. Its utility for predicting cardiac interventions is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score to predict the need for cardiac stent or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We conducted a retrospective chart review of 625 consecutive subjects with chest pain presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) with a HEART pathway protocol in place. We also reviewed each subject's record for evidence of major adverse cardiac events within 6 weeks following their ED visit. We double-abstracted 10% of the charts for quality assurance. We included subjects if they were ≥ 18 at the time of presentation and had a chief complaint of chest pain. We excluded subjects if they did not have an electrocardiogram or troponin, or if their chart lacked sufficient information to calculate the history portion of their HEART score. Of 625 charts, 449 subjects met criteria for study inclusion. The area under the receiver operator curve reported as c-statistics was 0.877 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.806-0.949] for the HEART score's ability to predict cardiac stent and 0.921 (95% CI 0.858-0.984) for CABG. There is a strong association between increasing HEART scores and the need for revascularization which may provide emergency physicians justification for expedited cardiology consultation and admission for these patients. These findings require further prospective validation.

This paper discusses a possible weakness of the HEART Pathway specific to patients identified as high risk, requiring admission for inpatient risk stratification. Emergency Department (ED) crowding is at an all-time high and the possibility that many of these patients will board in the ED for a period of time before they are transported to an inpatient ward is becoming more likely. Given troponins peak at 6 h after the initial cardiac injury, it is plausible an initial troponin could still remain negative upon arrival. Extending the HEART Pathway to include a 3-hour delta troponin for admitted patients boarded in the emergency department may help alert the patient's inpatient team of those requiring more aggressive evaluations or more timely interventions. The case discussed herein highlights the course of a patient who was admitted to a medicine floor for chest pain along the HEART Pathway. After remaining in the ED for 3 h following admission a second troponin was drawn that resulted in the diagnosis of a non-ST segment myocardial infarction. The patient then received further management in the ED and a change in admission to the Cardiac Care Unit instead of the medicine floor. The patient ultimately received a Coronary Artery Bypass Graft during admission. If the patient had not had the second troponin while in the ED this care would have been delayed., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Emergency physicians must be able to effectively prognosticate outcomes for patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain. The HEART score offers a prognostication tool, but external validation studies are limited. We conducted an external retrospective validation study of the HEART score among ED patients presenting to our ED with chest pain from 1 January 2014 to 9 June 2014. We utilized chart review methodology to abstract data from each patient's electronic medical record. We collected data relevant to each of the five elements of the HEART score: history, electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation, patient age, patient risk factors, and troponin levels. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of the HEART score (0-10) for predicting the primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over 6 weeks following the ED visit (coronary revascularization, myocardial infarction, or mortality). We randomly selected 10% of patient charts from which a second investigator abstracted all data to assess inter-rater reliability for all study variables. Of 625 charts reviewed, we abstracted data on 417 (66.7%) consecutive patients meeting study inclusion criteria. Thirty-one (7.4%) of these patients experienced 6-week MACE. We observed no instances of MACE within 6 weeks among subjects with a HEART score of 3 or less. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) is 0.885 (95% confidence interval 0.838-0.931). Patients with a HEART score ≤3 are at low risk for 6-week MACE. Hence, these patients may be candidates for outpatient follow-up instead of inpatient admission for cardiac risk stratification.