↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Received care compared to ADP-guided care of patients admitted to hospital with chest pain of possible cardiac origin

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of General Medicine, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Received care compared to ADP-guided care of patients admitted to hospital with chest pain of possible cardiac origin
Published in
International Journal of General Medicine, September 2018
DOI 10.2147/ijgm.s166570
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Perera, Leena Aggarwal, Ian A Scott, Bentley Logan

Abstract

To assess the extent to which accelerated diagnostic protocols (ADPs), compared to traditional care, identify patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with chest pain who are at low cardiac risk and eligible for early ED discharge. Retrospective study of 290 patients admitted to hospital for further evaluation of chest pain following negative ED workup (no acute ischemic electrocardiogram [ECG] changes or elevation of initial serum troponin assay). Demographic data, serial ECG and troponin results, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score, cardiac investigations, and outcomes (confirmed acute coronary syndrome [ACS] at discharge and major adverse cardiac events [MACEs]) over 6 months of follow-up were analyzed. A validated ADP (ADAPT-ADP) was retrospectively applied to the cohort, and processes and outcomes of ADP-guided care were compared with those of care actually received. Patients had mean (±SD) TIMI score of 1.8 (±1.7); six (2.0%) patients were diagnosed with ACS at discharge. At 6 months, one patient (0.3%) re-presented with ACS and two (0.6%) died of non-coronary causes. The ADAPT-ADP defined 97 (33.4%) patients as being at low risk and eligible for early ED discharge, but who instead incurred mean hospital stay of 1.5 days, with 40.2% in telemetry beds, and 21.6% subject to non-invasive testing with only one positive result for coronary artery disease. None had a discharge diagnosis of ACS or developed MACE at 6 months. Compared to traditional care, application of the ADAPT-ADP would have allowed one-third of chest pain patients with initially negative investigations in ED to have been safely discharged from ED.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 8 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2018.
All research outputs
#13,175,336
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#398
of 1,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,771
of 336,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,496 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.