Testing a Cardiovascular Ambulatory Rapid Evaluation for Patients with Chest Pain (CARE-CP)
Project Number1R01HS029017-01A1
Former Number1R01HS029017-01
Contact PI/Project LeaderMAHLER, SIMON A
Awardee OrganizationWAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES
Description
Abstract Text
PROJECT SUMMARY
Current care patterns for the 7 million patients visiting Emergency Departments (EDs) in the United States with
chest pain are heterogenous and not sustainable from a healthcare quality or economic perspective. Chest pain
is the second most common cause of ED visits and most common reason for short-stay hospitalizations. During
these hospitalizations patients undergo in-depth evaluations (stress testing, computed tomography coronary
angiography, or invasive angiography), but ultimately <10% are diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
These evaluations cost $3 billion annually and strain health system resources without clear evidence of improved
health outcomes or patient experience. Our preliminary data suggest that moderate risk patients (35% of patients
with chest pain) can be safely managed as outpatients using a cardiovascular ambulatory rapid evaluation
(CARE) strategy as an alternative to hospitalization. In the CARE strategy, patients are discharged from the ED
and receive outpatient clinic follow-up within 72 hours focused on medical management for cardiovascular risk
factors (e.g., hypertension, diabetes) and determining whether further cardiac testing is needed. This strategy
aims to enhance patient-centered outcomes while safely and equitably decreasing hospital resource utilization.
However, equipoise exists between outpatient and hospitalization strategies for moderate risk patients. There is
a paucity of prospective data evaluating the efficacy and patient-centeredness of outpatient chest pain evaluation
strategies in moderate risk patients. Thus, it is unclear whether use of an outpatient chest pain management
strategy (CARE) will safely reduce healthcare utilization and be preferred by patients compared to a traditional
hospitalization strategy. To address this key evidence gap, we propose the first prospective multisite randomized
trial testing outpatient vs hospitalization strategies in moderate risk patients. Our experienced research team will
randomize 502 patients 1:1 to the CARE or hospitalization management arms at three ED sites with a history of
high recruitment rates and productive collaborations in cardiovascular clinical trials. The primary outcome will be
hospital-free days (HFD) over a 30-day period. Patient-centered outcomes, such as patient satisfaction and
experience and out-of-pocket cost will be assessed at 30-days. Additional endpoints include HFD over 1-year,
30-day and 1-year cardiovascular HFD, rates of noninvasive and invasive cardiac testing, cardiovascular
rehospitalizations, and cardiovascular repeat ED visits. Patients will be monitored for safety: the composite of
cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned coronary revascularization at 30-days. This novel
trial addresses a key evidence gap by providing guidance on how best to evaluate moderate risk ED patients
with acute chest pain. Without this guidance care patterns are likely to remain heterogeneous, inefficient, non-
patient-centered, and unguided by the highest level of evidence. We hypothesize that data from this trial will
support widespread implementation of a CARE strategy, which could improve the quality and value of care for
millions of patients in the U.S. and beyond.
Public Health Relevance Statement
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Each year 7 million patients seek care in U.S. Emergency Departments for chest pain. Most moderate-risk
patients undergo hospitalization for expensive testing aimed at identifying a heart attack, which costs the
healthcare system more than $3 billion annually without a clear improvement in patient outcomes. Our study will
compare rapid outpatient vs hospitalization management to determine the best strategy (based on patient-
centered measures and safe, equitable, and efficient resource use) for evaluating these patients.
No Sub Projects information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
Publications
Publications are associated with projects, but cannot be identified with any particular year of the project or fiscal year of funding. This is due to the continuous and cumulative nature of knowledge generation across the life of a project and the sometimes long and variable publishing timeline. Similarly, for multi-component projects, publications are associated with the parent core project and not with individual sub-projects.
No Publications available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
Patents
No Patents information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
Outcomes
The Project Outcomes shown here are displayed verbatim as submitted by the Principal Investigator (PI) for this award. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the PI and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Institutes of Health. NIH has not endorsed the content below.
No Outcomes available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
Clinical Studies
No Clinical Studies information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
News and More
Related News Releases
No news release information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
History
No Historical information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1
Similar Projects
No Similar Projects information available for 1R01HS029017-01A1