How Well Do Laboratories Adhere to Recommended Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Myocardial Infarction
| Autor: | Kristin M. Aakre, Fred S. Apple, Angelika Hammerer-Lercher, Sanja Stankovic, Michel Langlois, Robert H. Christenson, Hannsjoerg Baum, Marja P. van Dieijen-Visser, Ana Stavljenić-Rukavina, Christopher J. Duff, Päivi Laitinen, Kari Pulkki, Paul O. Collinson, Janne Suvisaari |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | MUMC+: DA CDL Algemeen (9), Med Microbiol, Infect Dis & Infect Prev, RS: CARIM - R2.02 - Cardiomyopathy, RS: NUTRIM - R4 - Gene-environment interaction |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Package insert Clinical Biochemistry Cardiac marker Myocardial Infarction MEDLINE 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Internal medicine medicine Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Myocardial infarction biology Clinical Laboratory Techniques business.industry Biochemistry (medical) Miocardial infarction cardiac markers clinical guidelines management University hospital medicine.disease Troponin Europe Evidence-Based Practice North America biology.protein Biomarker (medicine) Guideline Adherence Myocardial infarction diagnosis Medical emergency business Biomarkers |
| Zdroj: | Clinical Chemistry, 62(9), 1264-1271. American Association for Clinical Chemistry |
| ISSN: | 1530-8561 0009-9147 |
| DOI: | 10.1373/clinchem.2016.259515 |
| Popis: | BACKGROUND We undertook an assessment of current use of evidence-based guidelines for the use of cardiac biomarkers in Europe (EU) and North America (NA). METHODS In 2013–2014 a web-based questionnaire was distributed via NA and EU biochemical societies. Questions covered cardiac biomarkers measured, analytical methods used, decision thresholds, and use of decision-making protocols. Results were collated using a central database and analyzed using comparative and descriptive nonparametric statistics. RESULTS In EU, returns were obtained from 442 hospitals, 50% central or university hospitals, and 39% from local hospitals from 35 countries with 395/442 (89%) provided an acute service. In NA there were 91 responses (63.7% central or university hospitals, 19.8% community hospitals) with 76/91 (83.5%) providing an acute service. Cardiac troponin was the preferred cardiac biomarker in 99.5% (EU) and 98.7% (NA), and the first line marker in 97.7% (EU) and 97.4% (NA). There were important differences in the choice of decision limits and their derivations. The origin of the information was also significantly different, with EU vs NA as follows: package insert, 61.9% vs 40%; publications, 17.1% vs 15.0%; local clinical or analytical validation choice, 21.0% vs 45.0%; P = 0.0003. CONCLUSIONS There are significant differences between EU and NA use of cardiac biomarkers. This probably relates to different availability of assays between EU and NA (such as high-sensitivity troponin assays) and different laboratory practices on assay introduction (greater local evaluation of assay performance occurred in NA). |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|