G Moreel | PubMed Health

PubMed1992

Evaluating patients with chest pain using classification and regression trees.

We collected data on 320 patients complaining to their general practitioner of a new episode of chest pain, discomfort or oppression. Relationships were examined between initial signs and symptoms and a follow-up diagnosis after a period of 2 weeks to 2 months. The data were analysed with CART, a statistical decision theory software package. In our first run, the number of misclassifications by CART was 56%. After regrouping of the data and diagnostic categories, there were 37% misclassifications. The most discriminating variable turned out to be pain on palpation. When comparing each of five diagnostic groups to all others, we found a positive predictive value of 27% for gastrointestinal diseases, 72% for cardiovascular disorders, 69% for respiratory diseases, 58% for psychopathology and 73% for chest wall pathology. The CART methodology needs further investigation and testing before any clinical application will be possible in general practice.

Chest Pain↗

PubMed1991

Chest pain: an evaluation of the initial diagnosis made by 25 Flemish general practitioners.

Twenty-five general practitioners collected information on 318 contacts of patients with a new episode of chest pain, discomfort or tightness. A list of complaints, signs and symptoms were checked, together with the initial diagnosis, made by the GP immediately after the physical examination. The initial diagnosis was compared to a follow-up diagnosis. The gain in certainty was also compared. The GP made a correct initial diagnosis in 82% of patients. In 8% there was a clinically important difference, and seven of 17 episodes of oesophageal disease were missed. For their initial diagnosis, the GP scored 74% certain, 20% uncertain and no diagnosis in 6%. For the final diagnosis, these figures were 88%, 8% and 4%.

Belgium↗