Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jan;175(1):67-75.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.5830.

Use of cardiac biomarker testing in the emergency department

Anil N Makam  1 , Oanh K Nguyen  1
Affiliations

Use of cardiac biomarker testing in the emergency department

Anil N Makam et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Jan.

Abstract

Importance: Cardiac biomarker testing is not routinely indicated in the emergency department (ED) because of low utility and potential downstream harms from false-positive results. However, current rates of testing are unknown.

Objective: To determine the use of cardiac biomarker testing overall, as well as stratified by disposition status and selected characteristics.

Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective study of ED visits by adults (≥18 years old) selected from the 2009 and 2010 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a probability sample of ED visits in the United States.

Exposures: Selected patient, visit, and ED characteristics.

Main outcomes and measures: Receipt of cardiac biomarker testing during the ED visit.

Results: Of 44,448 ED visits, cardiac biomarkers were tested in 16.9% of visits, representing 28.6 million visits. Biomarker testing occurred in 8.2% of visits in the absence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS)-related symptoms, representing 8.5 million visits, almost one-third of all visits with biomarker testing. Among individuals subsequently hospitalized, cardiac biomarkers were tested in 47.0% of all visits. In this group, biomarkers were tested in 35.4% of visits despite the absence of ACS-related symptoms. Among all ED visits, the number of other tests or services performed was the strongest predictor of biomarker testing independent of symptoms of ACS. Compared with 0 to 5 other tests or services performed, more than 10 other tests or services performed was associated with 59.55 (95% CI, 39.23-90.40) times the odds of biomarker testing. The adjusted probabilities of biomarker testing if 0 to 5, 6 to 10, or more than 10 other tests or services performed were 6.3%, 34.3%, and 62.3%, respectively.

Conclusions and relevance: Cardiac biomarker testing in the ED is common even among those without symptoms suggestive of ACS. Cardiac biomarker testing is also frequently used during visits with a high volume of other tests or services independent of the clinical presentation. More attention is needed to develop strategies for appropriate use of cardiac biomarkers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure
Figure. Study Flow Diagram
ED indicates emergency department. a Not mutually exclusive.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics: 2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;129(3):e28–e292. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000441139.02102.80. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction); American College of Emergency Physicians; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography andInterventions; Society of Thoracic Surgeons; American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation; Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine [published correction appears in J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(9):974] J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(7):e1–e157. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bhuiya FA, Pitts SR, McCaig LF. Emergency department visits for chest pain and abdominal pain: United States, 1999-2008. NCHS Data Brief. 2010;43:1–8. - PubMed
    1. Newby LK, Jesse RL, Babb JD, et al. ACCF 2012 expert consensus document on practical clinical considerations in the interpretation of troponin elevations: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation task force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(23):2427–2463. - PubMed
    1. de Lemos JA. Increasingly sensitive assays for cardiac troponins: a review. JAMA. 2013;309(21):2262–2269. - PubMed