Rapid access chest pain clinics--can they be justified?

Effectiveness of rapid access chest pain clinics: a systematic review of patient outcomes and resource utilisation

BACKGROUND

Rapid Access Chest Pain Clinics (RACPC) are widely used for the outpatient assessment of chest pain, but there appears to be limited high-quality evidence justifying this model of care. This study aimed to review the literature to determine the effectiveness of RACPCs.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies evaluating the effectiveness of RACPCs was conducted to assess the quality of the evidence supporting this model. Outcomes related to effectiveness included major adverse cardiovascular events, emergency department reattendance, cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction. Study quality was assessed using the RoB 2 tool, Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool or the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies checklist, as appropriate.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were eligible for inclusion, including one randomised trial. Five analytical cohort studies were included, with three comparing outcomes against non-RACPC controls. Three qualitative studies were included. Most reports were descriptive. Findings were consistent with RACPCs being associated with favourable clinical outcomes, reduced emergency department reattendance, cost-effectiveness and high patient satisfaction. However, there was significant heterogeneity in care models, and overall literature quality was low, with a high risk of publication bias.

CONCLUSION

While the literature suggests RACPCs are safe and efficient, the quality of the available evidence is limited. Further high-quality data from adequately controlled clinical trials or large scare registries are needed to inform healthcare resource allocation decisions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023417110.

Frequency of extracardiac findings on "negative" CT coronary angiography studies

AIM

To evaluate the prevalence and nature of extracardiac findings identified on computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography (CTCA) in patients with chest pain but without evidence of coronary artery disease (CAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CTCA studies in patients referred to the hospital between January 2017 to February 2021 with chest pain and a suspected diagnosis of CAD were reviewed retrospectively for the presence of extracardiac findings. Consensus review of CTCA studies was performed by two experienced thoracic radiologists. The presence and severity of extracardiac findings, together with the likelihood that chest pain might be attributed to these, was recorded. Patient records were reviewed to ascertain the recording of extracardiac findings on initial CTCA reports and, where applicable, the nature of the follow-up.

RESULTS

Extracardiac findings (n=210) were present in 110/180 patients (61%) with a mean of 1.9 findings per patient. Extracardiac findings were more prevalent in patients aged ≥65 years compared to those <65 years (p<0.001). At least one extracardiac finding with the potential to cause chest pain was present in 40 patients (22%): degenerative disc disease (n=23 [13%]) and hiatus hernia (n=6 [3.3%]) were the most common extracardiac findings. Only 37.6% (79) of all retrospectively identified findings had been initially reported and, of these, 12.7% (10) required further follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Extracardiac findings are common in patients with no evidence of CAD on CTCA. The entire dataset should be evaluated for the presence of extracardiac findings that could explain chest pain symptoms on wide field of view reconstructions.