We have located links that may give you full text access.
Resource reduction in pediatric chest pain: Standardized clinical assessment and management plan.
Congenital Heart Disease 2018 January
OBJECTIVE: Using a Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan (SCAMP) for pediatric patients presenting to clinic with chest pain, we evaluated the cost impact associated with implementation of the care algorithm. Prior to introduction of the SCAMP, we analyzed charges for 406 patients with chest pain, seen in 2009, and predicted 21% reduction of overall charges had the SCAMP methodology been used. The SCAMP recommended an echocardiogram for history, examination, or ECG findings suggestive of a cardiac etiology for chest pain.
DESIGN: Resource utilization was reviewed for 1517 patients (7-21 years) enrolled in the SCAMP from July 2010 to April 2014.
RESULTS: Compared to the 2009 historic cohort, patients evaluated by the SCAMP had higher rates of exertional chest pain (45% vs 37%) and positive family history (5% vs 1%). The SCAMP cohort had fewer abnormal physical examination findings (1% vs 6%) and abnormal electrocardiograms (3% vs 5%). Echocardiogram use increased in the SCAMP cohort compared to the 2009 historic cohort (45% vs 41%), whereas all other ancillary testing was reduced: exercise stress testing (4% SCAMP vs 28% historic), Holter (4% vs 7%), event monitors (3% vs 10%), and MRI (1% vs 2%). Total charges were reduced by 22% ($822 625) by use of the Chest Pain SCAMP, despite a higher percentage of patients for whom echocardiogram was recommended compared to the historic cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: The Chest Pain SCAMP effectively streamlines cardiac testing and reduces resource utilization. Further reductions can be made by algorithm refinement regarding echocardiograms for exertional symptoms.
DESIGN: Resource utilization was reviewed for 1517 patients (7-21 years) enrolled in the SCAMP from July 2010 to April 2014.
RESULTS: Compared to the 2009 historic cohort, patients evaluated by the SCAMP had higher rates of exertional chest pain (45% vs 37%) and positive family history (5% vs 1%). The SCAMP cohort had fewer abnormal physical examination findings (1% vs 6%) and abnormal electrocardiograms (3% vs 5%). Echocardiogram use increased in the SCAMP cohort compared to the 2009 historic cohort (45% vs 41%), whereas all other ancillary testing was reduced: exercise stress testing (4% SCAMP vs 28% historic), Holter (4% vs 7%), event monitors (3% vs 10%), and MRI (1% vs 2%). Total charges were reduced by 22% ($822 625) by use of the Chest Pain SCAMP, despite a higher percentage of patients for whom echocardiogram was recommended compared to the historic cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: The Chest Pain SCAMP effectively streamlines cardiac testing and reduces resource utilization. Further reductions can be made by algorithm refinement regarding echocardiograms for exertional symptoms.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app