PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H Fulmer

Publications and source records attributed to H Fulmer.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

Potential cost effectiveness of initial myocardial perfusion imaging for assessment of emergency department patients with chest pain.

Previous investigations have confirmed the diagnostic and predictive usefulness of initial single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging using technetium-99m sestamibi in the evaluation of emergency department patients with chest pain. Patients with a normal SPECT perfusion scan performed during chest pain have an excellent short-term prognosis, and may be candidates for expeditious cardiac evaluation or outpatient management. However, there are limited data regarding the cost effectiveness of this technique. This analysis models the potential cost effectiveness of this procedure. In the current investigation we compared 2 model strategies for management of emergency department patients with typical chest pain and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG). In 1 model strategy, (the technetium-99m sestamibi SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging [SCAN] strategy), the decision whether to admit or discharge a patient from the emergency department is based on results of initial technetium-99m sestamibi SPECT myocardial imaging. Patients with normal scans are discharged; others are admitted. In the second model strategy, (the NO SCAN strategy), the decision whether or not to admit a patient is based on a combination of clinical and electrocardiographic variables. Patients with > or = 3 cardiac risk factors or an abnormal ECG are admitted; others are discharged. Adverse cardiac events were prospectively defined as cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or the need for acute coronary intervention. Costs were assigned using data derived from 102 patients who underwent SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging and an additional 107 emergency department patients with ongoing chest pain who either underwent or were eligible for initial SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. Mean (+/- SE) costs were highest among hospital admitted patients who experienced an adverse cardiac event ($21,375 +/- $2,733) and lowest in patients discharged from the emergency department ($715 +/- 71). Mean costs per patient of the SCAN strategy and NO SCAN strategy were $5,019 versus $6,051, respectively. These results were stable in a sensitivity analysis across a range of costs and predictive values. Thus, the SCAN model strategy for initial management of emergency department patients with typical ongoing angina and a normal or nondiagnostic ECG using initial myocardial perfusion imaging with technetium-99m sestamibi appears to be safe, accurate, and potentially cost effective. Validation of these preliminary retrospective observations will require further prospective investigation.

Angina Pectoris↗

Technetium-99m sestamibi myocardial perfusion imaging in the emergency room evaluation of chest pain.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the practicality and short-term predictive value of acute myocardial perfusion imaging with technetium-99m sestamibi in emergency room patients with typical angina and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram (ECG). BACKGROUND: Accuracy of emergency room chest pain assessment may be improved when clinical and ECG variables are used in conjunction with acute thallium-201 myocardial perfusion imaging. Technetium-99m sestamibi is a new radioisotope that is taken up by the myocardium in proportion to blood flow, but unlike thallium-201, it redistributes minimally after injection. Technetium-99m sestamibi can thus be injected during chest pain, and images acquired 1 to 2 h later (when patients have been clinically stabilized) will confirm whether abnormalities of perfusion were present at the time of injection. METHODS: One hundred two emergency room patients with typical angina (on the basis of a standardized angina questionnaire) and a normal or nondiagnostic ECG had a technetium-99m sestamibi injection during symptoms and were followed up for occurrence of adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary angioplasty, coronary surgery or coronary thrombolysis). RESULTS: Univariate predictors of cardiac events included the presence of three or more coronary risk factors (p = 0.009, risk ratio 3.3) and an abnormal or equivocal acute technetium-99m sestamibi scan (p = 0.0001, risk ratio 13.9). Multivariate regression analysis identified an abnormal perfusion image as the only independent predictor of adverse cardiac events (p = 0.009). Of 70 patients with a normal perfusion scan, only 1 had a cardiac event compared with 15 patients with equivocal scans or 17 patients with abnormal scans, with a cardiac event rate of 13% and 71%, respectively (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Initial myocardial perfusion imaging with technetium-99m sestamibi when applied in emergency room patients with typical angina and a normal or nondiagnostic ECG appears to be highly accurate in distinguishing between low and high risk subjects.

Adult↗

Ninety-day follow-up of patients in the emergency department with chest pain who undergo initial single-photon emission computed tomographic perfusion scintigraphy with technetium 99m-labeled sestamibi.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the emergency department with typical chest pain and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram have a 10% to 20% risk of nonfatal myocardial infarction. These patients can be stratified into groups of very low and very high risk for inpatient adverse cardiac events on the basis of initial 99mTc-labeled sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomographic (SPECT) perfusion imaging performed during symptoms. However, the intermediate or posthospital discharge prognosis of such patients has not been reported. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 150) with typical chest pain (based on a semiquantitative chest pain questionnaire) and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram underwent injection of 15 to 45 mCi 99mTc-labeled sestamibi injected during symptoms. Ninety-day follow-up history (telephone questionnaire and review of medical records) was obtained in 140 patients, and follow-up electrocardiography was performed in 72 patients. Cardiac events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, thrombolysis, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, or coronary artery bypass grafting) occurred before hospital discharge in 33 patients (18%), and these patients were excluded from further analysis. At follow-up, two (8%) of 25 patients with an abnormal initial scintigram and none of 87 patients with a normal scan had cardiac events (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with typical angina and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram, initial SPECT scintigraphy allows early accurate risk stratification. The previously observed excellent inpatient prognosis of patients with a normal scintigram appears to extend for at least 90 days of follow-up. These observations may provide a rational basis for safe and cost-effective outpatient evaluation of selected patients in the emergency department with typical angina, a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram, and a normal initial 99mTc-labeled SPECT perfusion scintigram performed during symptoms.

Angina Pectoris↗

The cluster committee: setting the stage for community-responsive care.

Recent reviews of medical education at the undergraduate and graduate level call for a greater emphasis on community-relevant teaching and development of partnerships between providers, academic health centers, and the community. The cluster committee, developed by the Center for Community Responsive Care, Inc., sets the stage. The cluster committee is an activity in which preventive medicine residents and fellows are trained in a community setting to participate in community-responsive health care. It is designed to meet the following goals: initiate the fellow in the steps of community-oriented primary care (COPC); develop a fellow's leadership skills; encourage relationships and coalitions within the community and among providers; and bring together the perspectives of community members, public health practitioners, academicians, and local clinicians regarding community health, as well as teach each about COPC. This article describes the cluster committee process, provides examples of a series of meetings, and presents lessons learned from the first six years of implementation.

Community Health Services↗