Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines

Abstract Background Syncope is a frequent reason for referral to the emergency department. After excluding a potentially life-threatening condition, the second objective is to find the cause of syncope. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the treating physician in us...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Veera K. van Wijnen, Reinold O. B. Gans, Wouter Wieling, Jan C. ter Maaten, Mark P. M. Harms
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-08-01
Series:BMC Emergency Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12873-020-00344-9
id doaj-6069f4cdab95497ba9a89ddf8a9a7212
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6069f4cdab95497ba9a89ddf8a9a72122020-11-25T03:31:54ZengBMCBMC Emergency Medicine1471-227X2020-08-012011910.1186/s12873-020-00344-9Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelinesVeera K. van Wijnen0Reinold O. B. Gans1Wouter Wieling2Jan C. ter Maaten3Mark P. M. Harms4Department of Internal and Emergency Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center GroningenDepartment of Internal and Emergency Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center GroningenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical CenterDepartment of Internal and Emergency Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center GroningenDepartment of Internal and Emergency Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center GroningenAbstract Background Syncope is a frequent reason for referral to the emergency department. After excluding a potentially life-threatening condition, the second objective is to find the cause of syncope. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the treating physician in usual practice and to compare this to the diagnostic accuracy of a standardised evaluation, consisting of thorough history taking and physical examination by a research physician. Methods This prospective cohort study included suspected (pre) syncope patients without an identified serious underlying condition who were assessed in the emergency department. Patients were initially seen by the initial treating physician and the usual evaluation was performed. A research physician, blinded to the findings of the initial treating physician, then performed a standardised evaluation according to the ESC syncope guidelines. Diagnostic accuracy (proportion of correct diagnoses) was determined by expert consensus after long-term follow-up. Results One hundred and one suspected (pre) syncope patients were included (mean age 59 ± 20 years). The usual practice of the initial treating physicians did not in most cases follow ESC syncope guidelines, with orthostatic blood pressure measurements made in only 40% of the patients. Diagnostic accuracy by the initial treating physicians was 65% (95% CI 56–74%), while standardised evaluation resulted in a diagnostic accuracy of 80% (95% CI 71–87%; p = 0.009). No life-threatening causes were missed. Conclusions Usual practice of the initial treating physician resulted in a diagnostic accuracy of 65%, while standardised practice, with an emphasis on thorough history taking, increased diagnostic accuracy to 80%. Results suggest that the availability of additional resources does not result in a higher diagnostic accuracy than standardised evaluation, and that history taking is the most important diagnostic test in suspected syncope patients. Netherlands Trial Registration: NTR5651. Registered 29 January 2016, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5532http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12873-020-00344-9SyncopeEmergency departmentDiagnostic accuracyHistory takingGuidelines
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Veera K. van Wijnen
Reinold O. B. Gans
Wouter Wieling
Jan C. ter Maaten
Mark P. M. Harms
spellingShingle Veera K. van Wijnen
Reinold O. B. Gans
Wouter Wieling
Jan C. ter Maaten
Mark P. M. Harms
Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
BMC Emergency Medicine
Syncope
Emergency department
Diagnostic accuracy
History taking
Guidelines
author_facet Veera K. van Wijnen
Reinold O. B. Gans
Wouter Wieling
Jan C. ter Maaten
Mark P. M. Harms
author_sort Veera K. van Wijnen
title Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
title_short Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
title_full Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
title_fullStr Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. ESC guidelines
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of evaluation of suspected syncope in the emergency department: usual practice vs. esc guidelines
publisher BMC
series BMC Emergency Medicine
issn 1471-227X
publishDate 2020-08-01
description Abstract Background Syncope is a frequent reason for referral to the emergency department. After excluding a potentially life-threatening condition, the second objective is to find the cause of syncope. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the treating physician in usual practice and to compare this to the diagnostic accuracy of a standardised evaluation, consisting of thorough history taking and physical examination by a research physician. Methods This prospective cohort study included suspected (pre) syncope patients without an identified serious underlying condition who were assessed in the emergency department. Patients were initially seen by the initial treating physician and the usual evaluation was performed. A research physician, blinded to the findings of the initial treating physician, then performed a standardised evaluation according to the ESC syncope guidelines. Diagnostic accuracy (proportion of correct diagnoses) was determined by expert consensus after long-term follow-up. Results One hundred and one suspected (pre) syncope patients were included (mean age 59 ± 20 years). The usual practice of the initial treating physicians did not in most cases follow ESC syncope guidelines, with orthostatic blood pressure measurements made in only 40% of the patients. Diagnostic accuracy by the initial treating physicians was 65% (95% CI 56–74%), while standardised evaluation resulted in a diagnostic accuracy of 80% (95% CI 71–87%; p = 0.009). No life-threatening causes were missed. Conclusions Usual practice of the initial treating physician resulted in a diagnostic accuracy of 65%, while standardised practice, with an emphasis on thorough history taking, increased diagnostic accuracy to 80%. Results suggest that the availability of additional resources does not result in a higher diagnostic accuracy than standardised evaluation, and that history taking is the most important diagnostic test in suspected syncope patients. Netherlands Trial Registration: NTR5651. Registered 29 January 2016, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5532
topic Syncope
Emergency department
Diagnostic accuracy
History taking
Guidelines
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12873-020-00344-9
work_keys_str_mv AT veerakvanwijnen diagnosticaccuracyofevaluationofsuspectedsyncopeintheemergencydepartmentusualpracticevsescguidelines
AT reinoldobgans diagnosticaccuracyofevaluationofsuspectedsyncopeintheemergencydepartmentusualpracticevsescguidelines
AT wouterwieling diagnosticaccuracyofevaluationofsuspectedsyncopeintheemergencydepartmentusualpracticevsescguidelines
AT janctermaaten diagnosticaccuracyofevaluationofsuspectedsyncopeintheemergencydepartmentusualpracticevsescguidelines
AT markpmharms diagnosticaccuracyofevaluationofsuspectedsyncopeintheemergencydepartmentusualpracticevsescguidelines
_version_ 1724570899890307072