Shimaa Mohamed Hasballa, Mohamed Aboel-Kassem F Abdelmegid, Mogedda Mohamed Mehany
{"title":"HEART vs EDACS Scores on Predicting Major Events Among Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome at the Cardiac Emergency Department.","authors":"Shimaa Mohamed Hasballa, Mohamed Aboel-Kassem F Abdelmegid, Mogedda Mohamed Mehany","doi":"10.1097/CNQ.0000000000000526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coronary risk scores, such as History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) and Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS) scores, help nurses identify suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who have a risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 30 days.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the accuracy of HEART and EDACS scores in predicting major events among patients suspected of ACS in the cardiac emergency department (ED).</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>A prospective correlational observational study design was performed on cardiac ED patients who presented with suspected ACS.</p><p><strong>Tools: </strong>Three tools were utilized to collect data pertinent to the study: Tool I comprises patients' assessment (personal characteristics, risk factors for ACS, and chest pain assessment sheet); Tool II is the risk assessment tool that includes HEART and EDACS scores; and Tool III is MACE incidence among studied patients within 30 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>HEART score was significantly (P < .01) higher among patients for whom MACE was present than absent. However, EDACS score showed no significant difference (P > .05) among patients whose MACE was present or absent. HEART risk score >6 correctly predicted MACE cases with sensitivity and specificity of 77.46% and 48.28%, respectively. However, EDACS score >18 correctly predicted MACE cases with sensitivity and specificity of 42.25% and 75.86%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study concludes that HEART score has better sensitivity than EDACS in predicting MACE among suspected ACS patients at the cardiac ED. The HEART score provides the nurses with a quicker and more reliable predictor of MACE shortly after the arrival of the suspected ACS patients at the cardiac ED than the EDACS score. The study recommended the implementation of a HEART score in the cardiac ED for predicting MACE in suspected ACS patients. Follow up closely for high-risk patients to MACE. An educational program should be made for nurses about the implementation of the heart score in the cardiac ED.</p>","PeriodicalId":10789,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Nursing Quarterly","volume":"47 4","pages":"296-310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Nursing Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CNQ.0000000000000526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Coronary risk scores, such as History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) and Emergency Department Assessment of Chest Pain Score (EDACS) scores, help nurses identify suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who have a risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 30 days.
Aim: To compare the accuracy of HEART and EDACS scores in predicting major events among patients suspected of ACS in the cardiac emergency department (ED).
Design and methods: A prospective correlational observational study design was performed on cardiac ED patients who presented with suspected ACS.
Tools: Three tools were utilized to collect data pertinent to the study: Tool I comprises patients' assessment (personal characteristics, risk factors for ACS, and chest pain assessment sheet); Tool II is the risk assessment tool that includes HEART and EDACS scores; and Tool III is MACE incidence among studied patients within 30 days.
Results: HEART score was significantly (P < .01) higher among patients for whom MACE was present than absent. However, EDACS score showed no significant difference (P > .05) among patients whose MACE was present or absent. HEART risk score >6 correctly predicted MACE cases with sensitivity and specificity of 77.46% and 48.28%, respectively. However, EDACS score >18 correctly predicted MACE cases with sensitivity and specificity of 42.25% and 75.86%, respectively.
Conclusion: This study concludes that HEART score has better sensitivity than EDACS in predicting MACE among suspected ACS patients at the cardiac ED. The HEART score provides the nurses with a quicker and more reliable predictor of MACE shortly after the arrival of the suspected ACS patients at the cardiac ED than the EDACS score. The study recommended the implementation of a HEART score in the cardiac ED for predicting MACE in suspected ACS patients. Follow up closely for high-risk patients to MACE. An educational program should be made for nurses about the implementation of the heart score in the cardiac ED.
期刊介绍:
Critical Care Nursing Quarterly (CCNQ) is a peer-reviewed journal that provides current practice-oriented information for the continuing education and improved clinical practice of critical care professionals, including nurses, physicians, and allied health care professionals.