B-type natriuretic peptide testing and the accuracy of heart failure diagnosis in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: It is often difficult to diagnose heart failure (HF) accurately in patients presenting with dyspnea to the emergency department (ED). This study assessed whether B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) testing in these patients improved the accuracy of HF diagnosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients presenting to the Alfred and the Northern Hospital EDs with a chief complaint of dyspnea were enrolled prospectively from August 2005 to April 2007. Patients were randomly allocated to have BNP levels tested or not. The diagnostic gold standard for HF was determined by 1 cardiologist and 1 emergency or respiratory physician who, blinded to the BNP result, independently reviewed all available information. The ED diagnosis of HF in the non-BNP group showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 65%, 92%, and 81%, respectively. The BNP group had a similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 66%, 90%, and 78%, respectively, for the diagnosis of HF in the ED. There was no significant difference between the BNP and non-BNP groups in any of the measures of diagnostic accuracy for HF. CONCLUSIONS: In the clinical setting of EDs, availability of BNP levels did not significantly improve the accuracy of a diagnosis of HF. Clinical Trial Registration- clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00163709.

B-type natriuretic peptide testing, clinical outcomes, and health services use in emergency department patients with dyspnea: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is used to diagnose heart failure, but the effects of using the test on all dyspneic patients is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether BNP testing alters clinical outcomes and health services use of acutely dyspneic patients. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blind study. Patients were assigned to a treatment group through randomized numbers in a sealed envelope. Patients were blinded to the intervention, but clinicians and those who assessed trial outcomes were not. SETTING: 2 Australian teaching hospital emergency departments. PATIENTS: 612 consecutive patients who presented with acute severe dyspnea from August 2005 to March 2007. INTERVENTION: BNP testing (n = 306) or no testing (n = 306). MEASUREMENTS: Admission rates, length of stay, and emergency department medications (primary outcomes); mortality and readmission rates (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: There were no between-group differences in hospital admission rates (85.6% [BNP group] vs. 86.6% [control group]; difference, -1.0 percentage point [95% CI, -6.5 to 4.5 percentage points]; P = 0.73), length of admission (median, 4.4 days [interquartile range, 2 to 9 days] vs. 5.0 days [interquartile range, 2 to 9 days]; P = 0.94), or management of patients in the emergency department. Test discrimination was good (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, 0.87 [CI, 0.83 to 0.91]). Adverse events were not measured. LIMITATION: Most patients were very short of breath and required hospitalization; the findings might not apply for evaluating patients with milder degrees of breathlessness. CONCLUSION: Measurement of BNP in all emergency department patients with severe shortness of breath had no apparent effects on clinical outcomes or use of health services. The findings do not support routine use of BNP testing in all severely dyspneic patients in the emergency department. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Janssen-Cilag.

Trauma systems and emergency medicine.

The impact of trauma is a major public health challenge which is likely to escalate in the early 21st century. A systematic approach to this problem is required. This review explains the conceptual framework that defines a trauma system, gives a brief historical perspective and describes some of the essential elements of the system which should make a difference to patient outcome. Emergency physicians are well placed to play a leading role in the development and implementation of trauma systems.