急性冠状动脉综合征患者的症状与前往急诊科的交通方式之间的关系。

Leslie L Davis, Thomas P McCoy, Barbara Riegel, Sharon McKinley, Lynn V Doering, Debra K Moser
{"title":"急性冠状动脉综合征患者的症状与前往急诊科的交通方式之间的关系。","authors":"Leslie L Davis, Thomas P McCoy, Barbara Riegel, Sharon McKinley, Lynn V Doering, Debra K Moser","doi":"10.1097/DCC.0000000000000566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with symptoms matching their expectations of a heart attack are more likely to use emergency medical services (EMS) than not.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether presenting symptom clusters are associated with EMS use in ACS patients and if EMS use or symptom clusters are associated with prehospital delay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This secondary analysis used data from the PROMOTION trial, a randomized clinical trial that enrolled 3522 subjects with a history of or at risk for ACS from 5 sites in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Subjects were randomized to usual care or an educational intervention to reduce prehospital delay. During the 2-year follow-up, subjects admitted for ACS were asked about symptoms, time of symptom onset, and mode of transportation to the hospital. Symptoms were grouped into classic ACS, pain symptoms, and stress symptoms clusters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3522 subjects enrolled, 331 sought care for ACS during follow-up; 278 had transportation mode documented; 121 (44%) arrived via EMS. Classic ACS plus pain symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.66; P = .011), classic ACS plus stress symptoms (AOR, 2.61; P = .007), and classic ACS plus both pain and stress symptoms (AOR, 3.90; P = .012) were associated with higher odds of EMS use versus classic ACS symptoms alone. Emergency medical services use resulted in a 68.5-minute shorter median delay (P = .002) versus non-EMS use. Symptom clusters were not predictive of delay time in the adjusted model (P = .952).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although chest symptoms were the most prevalent symptoms for most (85%), the combination of classic ACS symptoms with other symptom clusters was associated with higher EMS use. Further research is needed to determine whether a combination of symptom clusters helps patients correctly interpret ACS symptoms to better understand how symptom clusters influence EMS use.</p>","PeriodicalId":46646,"journal":{"name":"Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9897491/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of Symptoms and Mode of Transportation to Emergency Department in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome.\",\"authors\":\"Leslie L Davis, Thomas P McCoy, Barbara Riegel, Sharon McKinley, Lynn V Doering, Debra K Moser\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/DCC.0000000000000566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with symptoms matching their expectations of a heart attack are more likely to use emergency medical services (EMS) than not.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether presenting symptom clusters are associated with EMS use in ACS patients and if EMS use or symptom clusters are associated with prehospital delay.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This secondary analysis used data from the PROMOTION trial, a randomized clinical trial that enrolled 3522 subjects with a history of or at risk for ACS from 5 sites in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Subjects were randomized to usual care or an educational intervention to reduce prehospital delay. During the 2-year follow-up, subjects admitted for ACS were asked about symptoms, time of symptom onset, and mode of transportation to the hospital. Symptoms were grouped into classic ACS, pain symptoms, and stress symptoms clusters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3522 subjects enrolled, 331 sought care for ACS during follow-up; 278 had transportation mode documented; 121 (44%) arrived via EMS. Classic ACS plus pain symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.66; P = .011), classic ACS plus stress symptoms (AOR, 2.61; P = .007), and classic ACS plus both pain and stress symptoms (AOR, 3.90; P = .012) were associated with higher odds of EMS use versus classic ACS symptoms alone. Emergency medical services use resulted in a 68.5-minute shorter median delay (P = .002) versus non-EMS use. Symptom clusters were not predictive of delay time in the adjusted model (P = .952).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although chest symptoms were the most prevalent symptoms for most (85%), the combination of classic ACS symptoms with other symptom clusters was associated with higher EMS use. Further research is needed to determine whether a combination of symptom clusters helps patients correctly interpret ACS symptoms to better understand how symptom clusters influence EMS use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9897491/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.0000000000000566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.0000000000000566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者的症状符合其对心脏病发作的预期时,比不符合预期时更有可能使用急救服务:急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者如果症状符合其对心脏病发作的预期,则更有可能使用紧急医疗服务(EMS):确定急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者出现的症状群是否与使用急救服务有关,以及使用急救服务或症状群是否与院前延误有关:该随机临床试验从美国、澳大利亚和新西兰的 5 个地点招募了 3522 名有 ACS 病史或有 ACS 风险的受试者。受试者被随机分配接受常规治疗或教育干预,以减少院前延误。在为期两年的随访中,对因急性冠状动脉综合征入院的受试者询问了症状、症状出现的时间以及前往医院的交通方式。症状分为典型 ACS、疼痛症状和压力症状群组:结果:在 3522 名登记对象中,有 331 人在随访期间因 ACS 就医;278 人的交通方式有记录;121 人(44%)通过急救服务到达医院。典型 ACS 加疼痛症状(调整赔率 [AOR],2.66;P = .011)、典型 ACS 加压力症状(AOR,2.61;P = .007)、典型 ACS 加疼痛和压力症状(AOR,3.90;P = .012)与单纯典型 ACS 症状相比,使用急救服务的几率更高。与未使用急救服务相比,使用急救服务可使中位延迟时间缩短 68.5 分钟(P = .002)。在调整后的模型中,症状群不能预测延迟时间(P = .952):讨论:虽然胸部症状是大多数人(85%)最常见的症状,但典型 ACS 症状与其他症状群的组合与较高的 EMS 使用率相关。需要进一步研究确定症状群的组合是否有助于患者正确解释 ACS 症状,以便更好地了解症状群如何影响急救服务的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Association of Symptoms and Mode of Transportation to Emergency Department in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Background: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with symptoms matching their expectations of a heart attack are more likely to use emergency medical services (EMS) than not.

Objective: To determine whether presenting symptom clusters are associated with EMS use in ACS patients and if EMS use or symptom clusters are associated with prehospital delay.

Methods: This secondary analysis used data from the PROMOTION trial, a randomized clinical trial that enrolled 3522 subjects with a history of or at risk for ACS from 5 sites in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Subjects were randomized to usual care or an educational intervention to reduce prehospital delay. During the 2-year follow-up, subjects admitted for ACS were asked about symptoms, time of symptom onset, and mode of transportation to the hospital. Symptoms were grouped into classic ACS, pain symptoms, and stress symptoms clusters.

Results: Of 3522 subjects enrolled, 331 sought care for ACS during follow-up; 278 had transportation mode documented; 121 (44%) arrived via EMS. Classic ACS plus pain symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.66; P = .011), classic ACS plus stress symptoms (AOR, 2.61; P = .007), and classic ACS plus both pain and stress symptoms (AOR, 3.90; P = .012) were associated with higher odds of EMS use versus classic ACS symptoms alone. Emergency medical services use resulted in a 68.5-minute shorter median delay (P = .002) versus non-EMS use. Symptom clusters were not predictive of delay time in the adjusted model (P = .952).

Discussion: Although chest symptoms were the most prevalent symptoms for most (85%), the combination of classic ACS symptoms with other symptom clusters was associated with higher EMS use. Further research is needed to determine whether a combination of symptom clusters helps patients correctly interpret ACS symptoms to better understand how symptom clusters influence EMS use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
102
期刊介绍: The primary purpose of Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing™ is to provide nurses with accurate, current, and relevant information and services to excel in critical care practice.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of a Standardized Process in Optimizing Appropriate Use of Progressive Care Unit Beds in a Tertiary Care Facility. End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Measurement in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest as a Predictor of Return of Spontaneous Circulation: A Literature Review. Lessons Learned From Ventilated and Proned Patients With COVID-19: A Multisite Retrospective Study to Identify Predictive Factors for Facial Pressure Injuries. Nursing Interventions and Intracranial Pressure Change in Pediatric Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. Prevalence of Impostor Phenomenon Among Final-Semester Baccalaureate Nursing Students.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1