Main Article Content
Clinicians ignore best practice guidelines: Prospective audit of cardiac injury marker ordering in patients with chest pain
Abstract
Background. Chest pain is a frequent presenting symptom and is a diagnostic challenge. Recent recommendations state that high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays are the only biochemical test required in the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and that other biomarkers such as myoglobin or creatine kinase (CK)-MB isoform are not indicated.
Objective. To establish whether clinician ordering in the setting of suspected ACS was in keeping with recent recommendations.
Methods. A prospective audit was undertaken of all requests for cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and CK-MB received at a large tertiary hospital in Durban, South Africa, during a 20-day period in December 2012.
Results. A total of 193 cardiac marker requests were received: 12 (6.2%) requests were for cTnI alone; 8 (4.1%) were for CK-MB alone; and the remaining 173 (89.7%) were for both cTnI and CK-MB. Therefore, a total of 181 (93.8%) incorrect requests were received during this period. A total of 103 (53.4%) patients had values below the cut-off point of 40 ng/l for cTnI, i.e. ACS was ruled out. Of these, 15 had CK-MB values above the reference interval. A total of 12 (6.2%) patients had cTnI values >500 ng/l, i.e. ACS was ruled in; 33.3% of this group had normal CK-MB values.
Conclusion. Ordering patterns in the setting of ACS did not reflect current recommendations and were wasteful and potentially dangerous.
Objective. To establish whether clinician ordering in the setting of suspected ACS was in keeping with recent recommendations.
Methods. A prospective audit was undertaken of all requests for cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and CK-MB received at a large tertiary hospital in Durban, South Africa, during a 20-day period in December 2012.
Results. A total of 193 cardiac marker requests were received: 12 (6.2%) requests were for cTnI alone; 8 (4.1%) were for CK-MB alone; and the remaining 173 (89.7%) were for both cTnI and CK-MB. Therefore, a total of 181 (93.8%) incorrect requests were received during this period. A total of 103 (53.4%) patients had values below the cut-off point of 40 ng/l for cTnI, i.e. ACS was ruled out. Of these, 15 had CK-MB values above the reference interval. A total of 12 (6.2%) patients had cTnI values >500 ng/l, i.e. ACS was ruled in; 33.3% of this group had normal CK-MB values.
Conclusion. Ordering patterns in the setting of ACS did not reflect current recommendations and were wasteful and potentially dangerous.