Comparing the No Objective Testing rule to the HEART pathway

Abstract

We read with great interest the article by Stopyra and colleagues¹ comparing the no objective testing (NOT) rule and the HEART pathway using a cohort of 141 patients. The two rules, developed to risk stratify patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute chest pain, were 100% sensitive for identifying major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days. The HEART pathway identified a more sizeable portion of low-risk patients who could be discharged without additional cardiac testing.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

http://ift.tt/2tglEDh