MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117478908 · doi:10.29173/cjen532

Evaluating the impact of rapid high sensitivity troponin testing within a community hospital emergency department: A pilot study

2025· article· W7117478908 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ainslee Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChest painEmergency departmentTroponinAmbulatoryAcute coronary syndromeInterim analysisTroponin I

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Chest pain is a common presenting complaint to emergency departments (EDs), and many low-risk patients require serial troponin levels to rule out Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) prior to discharge. Troponin levels can take ≥ 1 hour to result, contributing to an increased length of stay (LOS). Point-of-care or rapid testing can expedite these testing and result times. The aim of this study was to evaluate the workflow and feasibility of the QuidelTriage® MeterPro (a rapid testing meter) for high sensitivity troponin testing for low-risk cardiac patients presenting with chest pain to the Oak Valley Health (OVH) - Markham Stouffville Hospital (MSH) ED. Methods: The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle was used to guide the implementation and evaluation of the QuidelTriage® MeterPro, using TriageTrue® High Sensitivity Troponin I testing within the ED. This pilot study evaluated the change in theoretical patient ED LOS and cost effectiveness of the device when compared to standard of care (SOC) procedures and workflows. Screening and recruitment was completed on weekdays within the ambulatory zones of the ED for low-risk patients presenting with chest pain requiring serial troponin testing. Patients consented to have extra blood drawn with their SOC bloodwork to run the analysis on the meter. Rapid testing results were blinded until data analysis. Results: N = 19 patients participated in the pilot study from February 2024 to September 2024. Interim data analysis showed the average LOS for low-risk cardiac patients was 5 hours and 8 minutes. Results demonstrated that the meter reported faster troponin results than central lab processing (M = 16 min and M = 1 hour and 2 min, respectively). Similarly, repeat troponin results demonstrated faster time to results using the meter compared to central lab (M = 18 min and M = 53 min, respectively). In summary, using the meter could have reduced theoretical ED LOS to 3 hours and 47 min and lab waiting time by 70.43%. All results from the QuidelTriage® MeterPro matched the results from the central lab Beckman Coulter-DXI600 analyzer. The cost analysis is being completed by the study team. Implications and lessons learned: Implementation of a rapid troponin testing meter such as the QuidelTriage® MeterPro within the mobile lab at OVH - MSH ED reduces troponin result time. This can improve workflows within the ED to reduce physician reassessment time and ultimately reduce the patients’ LOS. In some patient scenarios, rapid testing could replace central lab testing. Rapid troponin testing devices have the potential to optimize care within community and rural settings by improving throughput efficiency and by enabling the rapid identification of acute cardiac events. Next steps include further evaluation of the feasibility of rapid troponin testing for high-risk cardiac patients, in addition to further cost analyses for implementation planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Emergency NursingSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207