Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Weissman, I.
space
  arrow  Juni, J. E.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

LETTER

Evaluation of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department

right arrow Ian Weissman; William W. O'Neill; and Jack E. Juni

15 August 1995 | Volume 123 Issue 4 | Pages 314-318


TO THE EDITOR:

We read with interest Kaul and Abbott's recent editorial on evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department [1]. We have been applying these methods at William Beaumont Hospital for the last 2 years [2, 3]. Patients presenting to our chest pain clinic are immediately evaluated by a team of emergency physicians, cardiologists, and specially trained nurses. Patients with definite evidence of acute coronary ischemia are immediately triaged and treated. Those whose chest pain remains unexplained have radioisotope single-photon emission computed tomographic imaging in the emergency center with Tc-99m sestamibi using a dedicated {gamma} camera. The resulting images are immediately sent by computer network to a nuclear medicine physician for interpretation. Thus, 24-hour coverage is provided.

The activation of this chest pain clinic using Kaul and Abbott's strategy has improved efficiency and reduced cost. The addition of radionuclide imaging has had an additional dramatic effect. In patients with unexplained chest pain, the radionuclide scan changed the physicians' management decision in 34 of the first 50 patients (68%). All but one of these patients were sent to a lower-intensity destination. Twenty-nine of these 34 patients (29 of the first 50 patients [58%]) were sent home from the emergency center on the basis of the scan. Initial follow-up has shown that no patient sent home on the basis of the scan subsequently had a significant adverse cardiac event. The cost savings was $1771 per patient. A total of 69.4 inpatient hospital days were avoided in the first 50 patients seen.

This team approach using emergency, cardiology, and nuclear medicine physicians has permitted patients with chest pain to be evaluated and managed quickly, efficiently, and cost-effectively. Although Kaul and Abbott are correct that nuclear imaging techniques are not yet widely used in this setting, these results indicate that their implementation would be economically advantageous. The use of nuclear perfusion imaging combined with today's rapid computer networks allows skilled nuclear medicine physicians (at centralized or remote locations) to quickly and cost-effectively provide physicians who are evaluating patients with chest pain in the emergency center with critical diagnostic and prognostic information.


References
space
up arrowTop
dotReferences

1. Kaul S, Abbott RD. Evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (Editorial). Ann Intern Med. 1994; 121:976-8.

2. Weissman IA, Dickinson CZ, Dworkin HJ, O'Neill WW, Juni JE. Cost-effectiveness of emergency center SPECT imaging in patients with unexplained chest pain (Abstract). Radiology. 1994; 193(Suppl P):218.

3. Weissman IA, Dickinson CZ, Juni JE, O'Neill WW, Dworkin HJ. Emergency room myocardial perfusion SPECT with technetium-99m sestamibi aids physicians in diagnosing and triaging patients with unexplained chest pain: a pilot study (Abstract). Clin Nucl Med. 1994; 19:1036.

About Letters
space

The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:

•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references

•Type with double-spacing

•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.

Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.

Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.





box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Weissman, I.
space
  arrow  Juni, J. E.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space


 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online