A retrospective external validation study of the HEART score among patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain
Emergency physicians must be able to effectively prognosticate outcomes for patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with chest pain. The HEART score offers a prognostication tool, but external validation studies are limited. We conducted an external retrospective validation study of the HEART score among ED patients presenting to our ED with chest pain from 1 January 2014 to 9 June 2014. We utilized chart review methodology to abstract data from each patient’s electronic medical record. We collected data relevant to each of the five elements of the HEART score: history, electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation, patient age, patient risk factors, and troponin levels. We calculated the diagnostic accuracy of the HEART score (0–10) for predicting the primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over 6 weeks following the ED visit (coronary revascularization, myocardial infarction, or mortality). We randomly selected 10% of patient charts from which a second investigator abstracted all data to assess inter-rater reliability for all study variables. Of 625 charts reviewed, we abstracted data on 417 (66.7%) consecutive patients meeting study inclusion criteria. Thirty-one (7.4%) of these patients experienced 6-week MACE. We observed no instances of MACE within 6 weeks among subjects with a HEART score of 3 or less. The area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) is 0.885 (95% confidence interval 0.838–0.931). Patients with a HEART score ≤3 are at low risk for 6-week MACE. Hence, these patients may be candidates for outpatient follow-up instead of inpatient admission for cardiac risk stratification.
KeywordsChest pain HEART score Low risk Emergency department Acute coronary syndrome
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Statement of human and animal rights
For this type of study formal consent was not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was waived at our institution due to the chart review nature of the study.
- 1.Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2013) National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2013 emergency department summary tables. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
- 2.Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG et al (2014) 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 64:e139–e228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Amsterdam EA, Kirk JD, Bleumke DA et al (2010) American Heart Association Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research. Testing of low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 122:1756–1776CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 21.von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP et al (2007) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROB(E) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 147:573–577. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, Benjamin EJ, Budoff MJ, Fayad ZA, Lauer MS (2010) 2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines developed in collaboration with the American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular. J Am Coll Cardiol 56(25):e50–e103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar