Reducing Unnecessary Noninvasive Testing for Inpatients With Unstable Angina: The RUNIT Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Routine inpatient transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) for patients with unstable angina is common, but it anecdotally adds little value to clinical care. A practice audit at our academic hospital demonstrated that 61.5% of patients with troponin-negative chest pain (TNCP) had normal left ventriculography (LVG) during coronary angiography and normal TTE on the same admission (duplicate testing). METHODS: esting (RUNIT) protocol, a clinical algorithm applied by clinical nurses to patient with TNCP. We performed a prospective assessment of rate of duplicate testing before and after intervention. If patients met certain simple clinical criteria, their TTE was cancelled (RUNIT positive). Patients then proceeded to have either coronary angiography with LVG or noninvasive risk stratification. We aimed to reduce duplicate testing by 25% over a 1-year period. Balancing measures included pathology on ordered TTEs, 30-day readmission, length of stay, and number of LVG. RESULTS: = 0.008). CONCLUSION: We achieved a sustained reduction in reflexive TTE ordering in patients with TNCP, and we discuss the potential of nursing-led interventions to address other areas of low value care in cardiology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".