Escala predictiva para el diagnóstico de síndrome coronario agudo en la atención telefónica en un centro coordinador de emergencias: escala SCARE / Predicting a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome during telephone evaluation by an emergency dispatcher: the SCARE predictive scale

Objetivo. La correcta identificación en el primer contacto médico de los pacientes con un síndrome coronario agudo (SCA) es esencial. No existe ninguna escala predictiva para el diagnóstico de SCA en los centros de coordinación de emergencias (CCE) que facilite la toma de decisiones al equipo médico. El objetivo primario es construir y validar una escala de estas características. Método. Estudio prospectivo, observacional, unicéntrico, realizado durante 1 año (2016). Se incluyeron los pacientes que consultaron telefónicamente por dolor torácico no traumático en un CCE. Los pacientes incluidos se repartieron en las muestras de derivación y validación de forma aleatoria. La escala predictiva –escala SCARE– se construyó mediante regresión logística, la discriminación y calibración del modelo se realizó con el cálculo del área bajo la curva (ABC) de la característica operativa del receptor y el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow. Resultado. La muestra de derivación incluyó 902 pacientes y 7 de las variables recogidas se relacionaron con un diagnóstico final de SCA: sexo masculino, edad, tabaquismo, dolor torácico de características típicas, primer episodio de dolor torácico, diaforesis y la intuición del médico que realizó la entrevista telefónica. La utilización de la escala desarrollada en los 465 pacientes de la muestra de validación obtuvo un ABC de 0,81 (intervalo de confianza al 95% 0,76-0,87) y el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow fue de 5,18 (p = 0,74). Conclusión. La escala SCARE mostró una correcta discriminación y calibración. Es necesaria una validación externa multicéntrica antes de implementar su uso en los CCE

Background and objective. Correctly identifying patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on first contact is essential, yet emergency dispatchers currently lack a risk scale that can help predict an ACS diagnosis. Our main aim was to develop and validate such a risk scale. Methods. Prospective, observational single-center study in 2016 (January 1 to December 31). We included patients who called our emergency dispatch center to report nontraumatic chest pain. Included patients were randomly assigned to a development or a validation sample. The predictive SCARE scale was built with logistic regression analysis. Discrimination and calibration were analyzed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; calibration was assessed with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Results. The development sample included 902 patients. The regression model identified 7 variables associated with a final diagnosis of ACS: male sex, age, smoking, typical pain characteristics, first episode of chest pain, diaphoresis, and physician intuition (the teledispatcher’s suspicion). When we applied the scale in the validation sample of 465 patients the area under the curve was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.87). The Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic was 5.18 (P=.74). Conclusions. The SCARE scale had good discrimination and calibration properties. The scale should be further validated in an external sample from a multicenter study before it is implemented by emergency dispatch centers

Predicting a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome during telephone evaluation by an emergency dispatcher: the SCARE predictive scale. / Escala predictiva para el diagnóstico de síndrome coronario agudo en la atención telefónica en un centro coordinador de emergencias: escala SCARE.

OBJECTIVES: Correctly identifying patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on first contact is essential, yet emergency dispatchers currently lack a risk scale that can help predict an ACS diagnosis. Our main aim was to develop and validate such a risk scale. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, observational single-center study in 2016 (January 1 to December 31). We included patients who called our emergency dispatch center to report nontraumatic chest pain. Included patients were randomly assigned to a development or a validation sample. The predictive SCARE scale was built with logistic regression analysis. Discrimination and calibration were analyzed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; calibration was assessed with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. RESULTS: The development sample included 902 patients. The regression model identified 7 variables associated with a final diagnosis of ACS: male sex, age, smoking, typical pain characteristics, first episode of chest pain, diaphoresis, and physician intuition (the teledispatcher's suspicion). When we applied the scale in the validation sample of 465 patients the area under the curve was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.87). The Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic was 5.18 (P=.74). CONCLUSION: The SCARE scale had good discrimination and calibration properties. The scale should be further validated in an external sample from a multicenter study before it is implemented by emergency dispatch centers.

OBJETIVO: La correcta identificación en el primer contacto médico de los pacientes con un síndrome coronario agudo (SCA) es esencial. No existe ninguna escala predictiva para el diagnóstico de SCA en los centros de coordinación de emergencias (CCE) que facilite la toma de decisiones al equipo médico. El objetivo primario es construir y validar una escala de estas características. METODO: Estudio prospectivo, observacional, unicéntrico, realizado durante 1 año (2016). Se incluyeron los pacientes que consultaron telefónicamente por dolor torácico no traumático en un CCE. Los pacientes incluidos se repartieron en las muestra de derivación y validación de forma aleatoria. La escala predictiva ­escala SCARE­ se construyó mediante regresión logística, la discriminación y calibración del modelo se realizó con el cálculo del área bajo la curva (ABC) de la característica operativa del receptor y el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow. RESULTADOS: La muestra de derivación incluyó 902 pacientes y 7 de las variables recogidas se relacionaron con un diagnóstico final de SCA: sexo masculino, edad, tabaquismo, dolor torácico de características típicas, primer episodio de dolor torácico, diaforesis y la intuición del médico que realizó la entrevista telefónica. La utilización de la escala desarrollada en los 465 pacientes de la muestra de validación obtuvo un ABC de 0,81 (intervalo de confianza al 95% 0,76-0,87) y el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow fue de 5,18 (p = 0,74). CONCLUSIONES: La escala SCARE mostró una correcta discriminación y calibración. Es necesaria una validación externa multicéntrica antes de implementar su uso en los CCE.

Impact of a qSOFA-based triage procedure on antibiotic timing in ED patients with sepsis: A prospective interventional study.

BACKGROUND: It has not been investigated whether the quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment score (qSOFA), a new bedside tool for early sepsis detection, may help accelerating antibiotic initiation in ED patients with sepsis. METHODS: In this prospective pre/post quasi-experimental single-ED study, patients admitted with a suspected bacterial infection were managed using standard triage procedures only (baseline) or in association with qSOFA (intervention, with prioritization of patients with a qSOFA ≥ 2). RESULTS: A total of 151/328 (46.0%) and 185/350 (52.8%) patients with definite bacterial infection met the criteria for sepsis in the baseline and intervention periods, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of a qSOFA ≥ 2 for sepsis prediction were 17.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.6%-21.7%) and 98.8% (95% CI, 97.0%-99.5%). Eleven (7.3%) and 28 (13.5%) patients with sepsis in the baseline and intervention periods received a first antibiotic dose within one hour following triage (primary endpoint, absolute difference 6.2%, 95% CI [-0.5%, 12.7%], P = 0.08). The proportions of patients with sepsis receiving a first antibiotic dose within three hours following triage (39.7% [50/151] versus 36.8% [68/185], absolute difference - 2.9%, 95% CI [-13.3%, 7.3%], P = 0.65), requiring ICU admission, or dying in the hospital were similar in both periods. The median ED occupation rate at triage was 104.3% (interquartile range [IQR], 80.4%-128.3%), with a median number of 157 ED visits per day (IQR, 147-169). CONCLUSIONS: A qSOFA-based triage procedure does not improve antibiotic timing and outcomes in patients with sepsis admitted to a high-volume ED. The qSOFA value at triage was poorly sensitive for early sepsis detection. Trial registration (ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT03299894.