Sex differences in guideline‐consistent diagnostic testing for acute pulmonary embolism among adult emergency department patients aged 18–49

Author:

Jarman Angela F.1ORCID,Mumma Bryn E.1,White Richard2,Dooley Emily3,Yang Nuen Tsang4,Taylor Sandra L.4,Newgard Craig5ORCID,Morris Cynthia6,Cloutier Jared7,Maughan Brandon C.5ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine University of California–Davis, School of Medicine Sacramento California USA

2. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine University of California–Davis, School of Medicine Sacramento California USA

3. University of California–Davis School of Medicine Sacramento California USA

4. Department of Public Health Sciences University of California–Davis, School of Medicine Sacramento California USA

5. Department of Emergency Medicine Oregon Health and Science University Portland Oregon USA

6. Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology Oregon Health and Science University Portland Oregon USA

7. School of Medicine Oregon Health and Science University Portland Oregon USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequent diagnostic consideration in emergency department (ED) patients, yet diagnosis is challenging because symptoms of PE are nonspecific. Guidelines recommend the use of clinical decision tools to increase efficiency and avoid harms from overtesting, including D‐dimer screening in patients not at high risk for PE. Women undergo testing for PE more often than men yet have a lower yield from testing. Our study objective was to determine whether patient sex influenced the odds of received guideline‐consistent care.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study at two large U.S. academic EDs from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Nonpregnant patients aged 18–49 years were included if they presented with chest pain, shortness of breath, hemoptysis, or syncope and underwent testing for PE with D‐dimer or imaging. Demographic and clinical data were exported from the electronic medical record (EMR). Pretest risk scores were calculated using manually abstracted EMR data. Diagnostic testing was then compared with recommended testing based on pretest risk. The primary outcome was receipt of guideline‐consistent care, which required an elevated screening D‐dimer prior to imaging in all non–high‐risk patients.ResultsWe studied 1991 discrete patient encounters; 37% (735) of patients were male and 63% (1256) were female. Baseline characteristics, including revised Geneva scores, were similar between sexes. Female patients were more likely to receive guideline‐consistent care (70% [874/1256] female vs. 63% [463/735] male, p < 0.01) and less likely to be diagnosed with PE (3.1% [39/1256] female vs. 5.3% [39/735] male, p < 0.05). The most common guideline deviation in both sexes was obtaining imaging without a screening D‐dimer in a non–high‐risk patient (75% [287/382] female vs. 75% [205/272] male).ConclusionsIn this cohort, females were more likely than males to receive care consistent with current guidelines and less likely to be diagnosed with PE.

Funder

American Heart Association

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

Office of Research on Women's Health

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Emergency Medicine,General Medicine

Reference59 articles.

1. Diagnosis and Exclusion of Pulmonary Embolism

2. Global Burden of Thrombosis

3. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS)

4. Venous Thromboembolism (Blood Clots). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed Dec 18 2022.https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/dvt/data.html

5. RuiP KangK.National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2017 Emergency Department Summary Tables. National Center for Health Statistics. 2017. Accessed Dec 18 2022.https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhamcs/web_tables/2017_ed_web_tables‐508.pdf

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3