↓ Skip to main content

The cost-utility of point-of-care troponin testing to diagnose acute coronary syndrome in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The cost-utility of point-of-care troponin testing to diagnose acute coronary syndrome in primary care
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12872-017-0647-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle M. A. Kip, Hendrik Koffijberg, Marco J. Moesker, Maarten J. IJzerman, Ron Kusters

Abstract

The added value of using a point-of-care (POC) troponin test in primary care to rule out acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is debated because test sensitivity is inadequate early after symptom onset. This study investigates the potential cost-utility of diagnosing ACS by a general practitioner (GP) when a POC troponin test is available versus GP assessment only. A patient-level simulation model was developed, representing a hypothetical cohort of the Dutch population (>35 years) consulting the GP with chest complaints. All health related consequences as well as cost consequences were included. Both symptom duration, selection of patients in whom the POC troponin test is performed, and test performance at different time points were incorporated. Health outcomes were expressed as Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). The main outcome parameters involve the effect of POC troponin testing on (in)correct hospital referrals, QALYs, and costs. The POC troponin strategy decreases the referral rate in non-ACS patients from 38.46% to 31.85%. Despite a small increase in non-referral among ACS patients from 0.22% to 0.27%, the overall health effect is negligible. Costs will decrease with €77.25/patient (95% CI €-126.81 to €-33.37). The POC troponin strategy is likely cost-saving, by reducing hospital referrals. The small increase in missed ACS patients can be partly explained by conservative assumptions used in the analysis. Besides, current developments in POC troponin tests will likely further improve their diagnostic performance. Therefore, future prospective studies are warranted to investigate whether those developments make the POC troponin test to a safe and cost-effective diagnostic tool for diagnosing ACS in general practices.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 20%
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Engineering 7 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 22 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,556,753
of 23,050,116 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#433
of 1,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,783
of 317,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#16
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,050,116 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,641 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.