Psychological interventions for symptomatic management of non-specific chest pain in patients with normal coronary anatomy

Non-cardiac chest pain patients in the emergency department: Do physicians have a plan how to diagnose and treat them? A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Non-cardiac chest pain is common and there is no formal recommendation on what diagnostic tests to use to identify underlying diseases after an acute coronary syndrome has been ruled out.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic tests, treatment recommendations and initiated treatments in patients presenting with non-cardiac chest pain to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective medical chart review of patients presenting to the ED. Included were all medical records of patients aged 18 years and older presenting to the ED with chest pain and a non-cardiac discharge diagnosis between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2011. Information on the diagnosis, diagnostic tests performed, treatment initiated and recommendation for further diagnostic testing or treatment were extracted. The primary outcomes of interest were the final diagnosis, diagnostic tests, and treatment recommendations. A formal ACS rule out testing was defined as serial three troponin testing.

RESULTS

In total, 1341 ED admissions for non-cardiac chest pain (4.2% of all ED admissions) were analyzed. Non-specific chest pain remained the discharge diagnosis in 44.7% (n = 599). Identified underlying diseases included musculoskeletal chest pain (n = 602, 44.9%), pulmonary (n = 30, 2.2%), GI-tract (n = 35, 2.6%), or psychiatric diseases (n = 75, 5.6%). In 81.4% at least one troponin test and in 89% one ECG were performed. A formal ACS rule out troponin testing was performed in 9.2% (GI-tract disease 14.3%, non-specific chest pain 14.0%, pulmonary disease 10.0%, musculoskeletal chest pain 4.7%, and psychiatric disease 4.0%). Most frequently analgesics were prescribed (51%). A diagnostic test with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was prescribed in 20% (mainly in gastrointestinal diseases). At discharge, over 72 different recommendations were given, ranging from no further measures to extensive cardiac evaluation.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, a formal work-up to rule out ACS was found in a minority of patients presenting to the ED with chest pain of non-cardiac origin. A wide variation in diagnostic processes and treatment recommendations reflect the uncertainty of clinicians on how to approach patients after a cardiac cause was considered unlikely. Panic and anxiety disorders were rarely considered and a useful PPI treatment trial to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux disease was infrequently recommended.

Anxiety Associated With Increased Risk for Emergency Department Recidivism in Patients With Low-Risk Chest Pain

Anxiety contributes to the chest pain symptom complex in 30% to 40% of patients with low-risk chest pain seen in the emergency department (ED). The validated Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale-Anxiety subscale (HADS-A) has been used as an anxiety screening tool in this population. The objective was to determine the prevalence of abnormal HADS-A scores in a cohort of low-risk chest pain patients and test the association of HADS-A score with subsequent healthcare utilization and symptom recurrence. In a single-center, prospective, observational cohort study of adult ED subjects with low-risk chest pain, the HADS-A was used to stratify participants into 2 groups: low anxiety (score <8) and high anxiety (score ≥8). At 45-day follow-up, chest pain recurrence was assessed by patient report, whereas ED utilization was assessed through chart review. Of the 167 subjects enrolled, 78 (47%) were stratified to high anxiety. The relative risk for high anxiety being associated with at least one 30-day ED return visit was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.4 to 4.7) and this relative risk increased to 9.1 (95% confidence interval 2.18 to 38.6) for 2 or more ED return visits. Occasional chest pain recurrence was reported by more subjects in the high anxiety group, 68% vs 47% (p = 0.029). In conclusion, 47% of low-risk chest pain cohort had abnormal levels of anxiety. These patients were more likely to have occasional recurrence of their chest pain and had an increased risk multiple ED return visits.

Anxiety about anxiety: a survey of emergency department provider beliefs and practices regarding anxiety-associated low risk chest pain

Background

Approximately 80% of patients presenting to emergency departments (ED) with chest pain do not have any true cardiopulmonary emergency such as acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, psychological contributors such as anxiety are thought to be present in up to 58%, but often remain undiagnosed leading to chronic chest pain and ED recidivism.

Methods

To evaluate ED provider beliefs and their usual practices regarding the approach and disposition of patients with low risk chest pain associated with anxiety, we constructed a 22-item survey using a modified Delphi technique. The survey was administered to a convenience sample of ED providers attending the 2016 American College of Emergency Physicians Scientific Assembly in Las Vegas.

Results

Surveys were completed by 409 emergency medicine providers from 46 states and 7 countries with a wide range of years of experience and primary practice environment (academic versus community centers). Respondents estimated that 30% of patients presenting to the ED with chest pain thought to be low risk for ACS have anxiety or panic as the primary cause but they directly communicate this belief to only 42% of these patients and provide discharge instructions to 48%. Only 39% of respondents reported adequate hospital resources to ensure follow-up. Community-based providers reported more adequate follow-up for these patients than their academic center colleagues (46% vs. 34%; p = 0.015). Most providers (82%) indicated that they wanted to have referral resources available to a specific clinic for further outpatient evaluation.

Conclusion

Emergency Department providers believe approximately 30% of patients seeking emergency care for chest pain at low risk for ACS have anxiety as a primary problem, yet fewer than half discuss this concern or provide information to help the patient manage anxiety. This highlights an opportunity for patient centered communication.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12873-018-0161-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Guided Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy in patients with non-cardiac chest pain - a pilot randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Patients with recurrent episodes of non-cardiac chest pain may experience cardiac anxiety and avoidance behavior, leading to increased healthcare utilization. These patients might benefit from help and support to evaluate the perception and management of their chest pain. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of a short guided Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) program and explore the effects on cardiac anxiety, fear of body sensations, depressive symptoms, and chest pain in patients with non-cardiac chest pain, compared with usual care.

METHODS

A pilot randomized controlled study was conducted. Fifteen patients with non-cardiac chest pain with cardiac anxiety or fear of body sensations, aged 22-76 years, were randomized to intervention (n = 7) or control (n = 8) groups. The four-session CBT program contained psychoeducation, physical activity, and relaxation. The control group received usual care. Data were collected before and after intervention.

RESULTS

Five of seven patients in the intervention group completed the program, which was perceived as user-friendly with comprehensible language, adequate and varied content, and manageable homework assignments. Being guided and supported, patients were empowered and motivated to be active and complete the program. Patients in both intervention and control groups improved with regard to cardiac anxiety, fear of body sensations, and depressive symptoms, but no significant differences were found between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The Internet-delivered CBT program seems feasible for patients with non-cardiac chest pain, but needs to be evaluated in larger groups and with a longer follow-up period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02336880 . Registered on 8 January 2015.

Prevalence and Overlap of Noncardiac Conditions in the Evaluation of Low-risk Acute Chest Pain Patients

BACKGROUND

When patients present to the emergency department with a complaint concerning for heart disease, this often becomes the primary focus of their evaluation. While patients with noncardiac causes of chest pain outnumber those with cardiac causes, noncardiac etiologies are frequently overlooked. We investigated symptoms and noncardiac conditions in a cohort of patients with chest pain at low risk of cardiac disease.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a prospective registry of patients who were evaluated in our chest pain evaluation center. Registry participants completed standardized and validated instruments for depression (by Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ-9), anxiety (by Generalized Anxiety Disorder GAD-7), and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disorder (GERD; by GERD Symptom Frequency Questionnaire). Chest pain characteristics were recorded; severity was reported on a 10-point scale.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients were included in the investigation. Using the instruments noted above, the prevalence of depression was 34%, anxiety was 30%, and GERD was 44%, each of at least moderate severity. 32.5% of patients had 2 or more conditions. The median for the severity of angina was 7/10 and the number of episodes over the preceding week was 2, respectively. Severity of angina was associated with PHQ-9 (r = 0.238; P < 0.001) and GAD-7 (r = 0.283; P < 0.001) scores. The number of angina episodes over the prior week correlated with GERD Symptom Frequency Questionnaire (r = 0.256; P < 0.001) and PHQ-9 (r = 0.175; P = 0.019) scores. No correlation was observed between any of the scores and body mass index, smoking tobacco, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of low-risk acute chest pain patients, depression, anxiety, and GERD were common, substantial overlap was observed. The severity of these noncardiac causes of chest pain causes correlated with the self-reported severity and frequency of angina, but weakly. These conditions should be part of a comprehensive plan of care for chest pain management.

UPBEAT-UK: a programme of research into the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression in primary care patients

Background

Depression is common in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) but the relationship is uncertain. In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) have been remunerated for finding depression in CHD patients; however, it is unclear how to manage these patients.

Objectives

Our aim was to explore the relationship between CHD and depression in a GP population and to develop nurse-led personalised care (PC) for patients with CHD and depression.

Design

The UPBEAT-UK study consisted of four related studies. A cohort study of patients from CHD registers to explore the relationship between CHD and depression. A metasynthesis of relevant literature and two qualitative studies [patients’ perspectives and GP/practice nurse (PN) views on management of CHD and depression] helped develop an intervention. A pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of PC was conducted.

Setting

Thirty-three GP surgeries in south London.

Participants

Adult patients on GP CHD registers.

Interventions

From the qualitative studies, we developed nurse-led PC, combining case management and self-management theory. Following biopsychosocial assessment, a PC plan was devised for each patient with chest pain and depressive symptoms. Nurses helped patients address their most important related problems. Use of existing resources was promoted. Nurse time was conserved through telephone follow-up.

Main outcome measures

The main outcome of the pilot study of our newly developed PC for people with depression and CHD was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and to decide on the best outcome measures. Depression, measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – depression subscale, and chest pain, measured by the Rose angina questionnaire, were the main outcome measures for the feasibility and cohort studies. Cardiac outcomes in the cohort study included: attendance at rapid access chest pain clinics, stent insertion, bypass graft surgery, myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. Service use and costs were measured and linked to quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Data for the pilot RCT were obtained by research assistants from patient interviews at baseline, 1, 6 and 12 months for the pilot RCT and at baseline and 6-monthly interviews for up to 36 months for the cohort study, using standard questionnaires.

Results

Personalised care was acceptable to patients and proved feasible. The reporting of chest pain in the intervention group was half that of the control group at 6 months, and this reduction was maintained at 1 year. There was also a small improvement in self-efficacy measures in the intervention group at 12 months. Anxiety was more prevalent than depression in our CHD cohort over the 3 years. Nearly half of the cohort complained of chest pain at outset, with two-thirds of these being suggestive of angina. Baseline exertional chest pain (suggestive of angina), anxiety and depression were independent predictors of adverse cardiac outcome. Psychosocial factors predicted the continued reporting of exertional chest pain across the 3 years of follow-up. Costs were slightly lower for the PC group but QALYs were also lower. Neither difference was statistically significant.

Conclusions

Chest pain, anxiety, depression and social problems are common in patients on CHD registers in primary care and predict adverse cardiac outcomes. Together they pose a complex management problem for GPs and PNs. Our pilot trial of PC suggests a promising approach for treatment of these patients. Generalisation is limited because of the selection bias in recruitment of the practices and the subsequent participation rate of the CHD register patients, and the fact that the research took place in south London boroughs. Future work should explicitly explore methods for effective implementation of the intervention, including staff training needs and changes to practice.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21615909.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 4, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The acceptability and feasibility of an anxiety reduction intervention for emergency department patients with non-cardiac chest pain

Despite good physical prognosis, patients who receive a diagnosis of non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) may experience persistent pain and distress. While cognitive-behavioural interventions have been found to be effective for this group, they are difficult to deliver in busy emergency department (ED) settings. Addressing the acceptability and relevance of self-help interventions is an important initial step in addressing this need. This study sought to examine the acceptability and relevance of an evidence-based self-help intervention for ED patients with persistent NCCP and anxiety. Patient (interviews: N = 11) and specialist chest pain nurse (focus group: N = 4) views on acceptability and feasibility were examined. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Patients and nurses reported that there was a need for the intervention, as stress and anxiety are common among patients with NCCP, and provision of psychosocial support is currently lacking. Both patients and nurses reported that the intervention was relevant, acceptable, and potentially useful. Some changes to the intervention were suggested. Nurses reported that the intervention could be used within the existing staff resources available in an ED setting. This study represents an important first step towards developing a brief self-help intervention for ED patients with NCCP and anxiety. Further research should seek to determine the efficacy of the intervention in a pilot trial.

Associations between emotional instability, coping, and health outcomes among patients with non-cardiac chest pain

The main aim of this study was to examine the relationship of emotional instability with illness worry and perceived limitations due to chest pain, and investigate to what degree any associations are mediated by the following chest pain–related coping styles: acceptance, seeking emotional support, seeking instrumental support, and avoidance. Self-reported measures from 94 participants with non-cardiac chest pain were collected. The results showed a relationship between emotional instability, illness worry, and perceived limitations due to chest pain. Moreover, this relationship was mediated by the coping styles avoidance and acceptance.

'Everything's fine, so why does it happen?' A qualitative investigation of patients' perceptions of noncardiac chest pain

Aims and objectives

To examine patients' perceptions and experiences of noncardiac chest pain, within the framework of the common sense model.

Background

Patients with noncardiac chest pain have good physical prognosis, but frequently suffer prolonged pain and psychological distress. The common sense model may provide a good framework for examining outcomes in patients with noncardiac chest pain.

Design

Qualitative thematic analysis with semi‐structured interviews.

Methods

In 2010, participants recruited from an emergency department (N = 7) with persistent noncardiac chest pain and distress were interviewed using a semi‐structured schedule, and data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Seven themes were identified; six of which mapped onto core dimensions of the common sense model (identity, cause, timeline, consequences, personal control, treatment control). Contrary to previous research on medically unexplained symptoms, most participants perceived psychological factors to play a causal role in their chest pain. Participants' perceptions largely mapped onto the common sense model, although there was a lack of coherence across dimensions, particularly with regard to cause.

Conclusion

Patients with noncardiac chest pain lack understanding with regard to their condition and may be accepting of psychological causes of their pain.

Relevance to clinical practice

Brief psychological interventions aimed at improving understanding of the causes of noncardiac chest pain and providing techniques for managing pain and stress may be useful for patients with noncardiac chest pain.

An intervention to reassure patients about test results in rapid access chest pain clinic: a pilot randomised controlled trial

Background

Most people referred to rapid access chest pain clinics have non-cardiac chest pain, and in those diagnosed with stable coronary heart disease, guidance recommends that first-line treatment is usually medication rather than revascularisation. Consequently, many patients are not reassured they have the correct diagnosis or treatment. A previous trial reported that, in people with non-cardiac chest pain, a brief discussion with a health psychologist before the tests about the meaning of potential results led to people being significantly more reassured. The aim of this pilot was to test study procedures and inform sample size for a future multi-centre trial and to gain initial estimates of effectiveness of the discussion intervention.

Methods

This was a two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial in outpatient rapid access chest pain clinic in 120 people undergoing investigation for new onset, non-urgent chest pain. Eligible participants were randomised to receive either: a discussion about the meaning and implication of test results, delivered by a nurse before tests in clinic, plus a pre-test pamphlet covering the same information (Discussion arm) or the pre-test pamphlet alone (Pamphlet arm). Main outcome measures were recruitment rate and feasibility for a future multi-centre trial, with an estimate of reassurance in the groups at month 1 and 6 using a 5-item patient-reported scale.

Results

Two hundred and seventy people attended rapid access chest pain clinic during recruitment and 120/270 participants (44%) were randomised, 60 to each arm. There was no evidence of a difference between the Discussion and Pamphlet arms in the mean reassurance score at month 1 (34.2 vs 33.7) or at month 6 (35.3 vs 35.9). Patient-reported chest pain and use of heart medications were also similar between the two arms.

Conclusions

A larger trial of the discussion intervention in the UK would not be warranted. Patients reported high levels of reassurance which were similar in patients receiving the discussion with a nurse and in those receiving a pamphlet alone.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60618114 (assigned 27.05.2011).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2261-14-138) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Illness representations, psychological distress and non-cardiac chest pain in patients attending an emergency department

OBJECTIVE

Many patients who attend an emergency department (ED) with chest pain receive a diagnosis of non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP), and often suffer poor psychological outcomes and continued pain. This study assessed the role of illness representations in explaining psychological distress and continued chest pain in patients attending an ED.

METHODS

ED NCCP patients (N = 138) completed measures assessing illness representations, anxiety, depression and quality of life (QoL) at baseline, and chest pain at one month.

RESULTS

Illness representations explained significant amounts of the variance in anxiety (Adj. R² = .38), depression (Adj. R² = .18) and mental QoL (Adj. R² = .36). A belief in psychological causes had the strongest associations with outcomes. At one month, 28.7% of participants reported experiencing frequent pain, 13.2% infrequent pain and 58.1% no pain. Anxiety, depression and poor QoL, but not illness representations, were associated with continued chest pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that (i) continued chest pain is related to psychological distress and poor QoL, (ii) interventions should be aimed at reducing psychological distress and improving QoL and (iii) given the associations between perceived psychological causes and psychological distress/QoL, NCCP patients in the ED might benefit from psychological therapies to manage their chest pain.

The UPBEAT nurse-delivered personalized care intervention for people with coronary heart disease who report current chest pain and depression: a randomised controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Depression is common in people with coronary heart disease (CHD) and associated with worse outcome. This study explored the acceptability and feasibility of procedures for a trial and for an intervention, including its potential costs, to inform a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a nurse-led personalised care intervention for primary care CHD patients with current chest pain and probable depression.

METHODS

Multi-centre, outcome assessor-blinded, randomized parallel group study. CHD patients reporting chest pain and scoring 8 or more on the HADS were randomized to personalized care (PC) or treatment as usual (TAU) for 6 months and followed for 1 year. Primary outcome was acceptability and feasibility of procedures; secondary outcomes included mood, chest pain, functional status, well being and psychological process variables.

RESULT

1001 people from 17 General Practice CHD registers in South London consented to be contacted; out of 126 who were potentially eligible, 81 (35% female, mean age = 65 SD11 years) were randomized. PC participants (n = 41) identified wide ranging problems to work on with nurse-case managers. Good acceptability and feasibility was indicated by low attrition (9%), high engagement and minimal nurse time used (mean/SD = 78/19 mins assessment, 125/91 mins telephone follow up). Both groups improved on all outcomes. The largest between group difference was in the proportion no longer reporting chest pain (PC 37% vs TAU 18%; mixed effects model OR 2.21 95% CI 0.69, 7.03). Some evidence was seen that self efficacy (mean scale increase of 2.5 vs 0.9) and illness perceptions (mean scale increase of 7.8 vs 2.5) had improved in PC vs TAU participants at 1 year. PC appeared to be more cost effective up to a QALY threshold of approximately £3,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial and intervention procedures appeared to be feasible and acceptable. PC allowed patients to work on unaddressed problems and appears cheaper than TAU.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN21615909.

Illness perception among patients with chest pain and palpitations before and after negative cardiac evaluation

BACKGROUND

Patients with chest pain or palpitations often have poor outcomes following a negative cardiac evaluation, with symptom persistence, limitations in everyday activities, and reduced health-related quality of life. The aims of this study were to evaluate illness perceptions before and after negative cardiac evaluations and measure the ability of a self-report questionnaire to predict outcomes.

METHODS

Patients (N = 138) referred for chest pain or palpitations to a cardiac outpatient clinic were assessed before and six months after a negative cardiac evaluation. In addition to Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), all patients completed the Beck Depression Inventory and SF-36 Health Survey.

RESULTS

The emotional reactions to and understanding of symptoms had not improved six months after a negative cardiac evaluation. A stronger correlation between illness perceptions and health at follow-up than before the cardiac evaluation might explain the tendency for poor outcomes among these patients. Most of the eight BIPQ item scores before the negative cardiac evaluation were predictive of the outcome six months later. A single question asking about the perceived consequences of the complaints (BIPQ Item 1) rated before the cardiac evaluation was collapsed into a dichotomous variable with a cut-off at ≥4 which yields a sensitivity of 51%, a specificity of 85%, a positive predictive value of 71%, a negative predictive value of 69%, and an odds ratio of 5.7 (r = .38, p < .001) in predicting poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing illness perceptions is important in patients with negative cardiac tests for understanding and predicting outcomes.