Impact of Validated Diagnostic Prediction Model of Acute Heart Failure in the Emergency Department
Analysis of the Impact of Using a Validated Diagnostic Prediction Model of Acute Heart Failure in the Emergency Department
1 other identifier
interventional
186
3 countries
3
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate a validated diagnostic prediction model in the appropriate diagnosis of Acute Heart Failure (AHF) in patients presenting at the emergency department with undifferentiated dyspnea.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Sep 2010
Longer than P75 for not_applicable
3 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
September 1, 2010
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
September 1, 2010
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
September 2, 2010
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
June 1, 2014
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
June 1, 2014
CompletedJune 16, 2014
June 1, 2014
3.8 years
September 1, 2010
June 12, 2014
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Comparison of diagnostic model versus clinical judgment in appropriate diagnosis of Acute Heart Failure in dyspneic emergency department patients
60 days after patient presentation to the emergency department
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Determine if use of the diagnostic prediction model leads to cost savings and better health outcomes
From randomization until 60 days after patient presentation to the emergency department
Study Arms (2)
Clinician exposed to Model result
ACTIVE COMPARATORClinician blinded to Model result
EXPERIMENTALInterventions
Patients randomized to the arm where the clinician is exposed to the model results should be treated as per the model probability (i.e. if the model probability suggests AHF the clinician should treat for AHF).
Patients randomized to the arm where the clinician is blinded to the model results will undergo diagnostic tests and receive treatment as per the clinician's judgment and usual care standards.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Presentation to the ED with undifferentiated shortness of breath
You may not qualify if:
- Dyspnea of obvious cause, e.g. chest trauma, obvious clinical exacerbation of known chronic obstructive disease
- Obvious pulmonary edema in a patient with a known diagnosis of HF and recently admitted to hospital for HF
- Clinician does not plan to treat for AHF at all, but rather to pursue other causes of dyspnea (i.e., probability of AHF ≤ 20%)
- Clinician plans to treat for AHF and not to pursue other causes of dyspnea (i.e., probability of AHF ≥ 80%)
- Acute coronary syndrome within one month
- Chronic renal failure (serum creatinine ≥ 250 mol/l)
- Anticipated life expectancy \< 6 months due to non-cardiovascular causes
- Participation in another interventional outcome trial
- Inability to obtain informed consent, including inability of patient to understand English
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Unity Health Torontolead
- Roche Pharma AGcollaborator
Study Sites (3)
Wayne State University
Detroit, Michigan, 48201, United States
St. Michael's Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada
Waikato Hospital Cardiology Clinical Trials Unit
Waikato, New Zealand
Related Publications (4)
Januzzi JL Jr, Camargo CA, Anwaruddin S, Baggish AL, Chen AA, Krauser DG, Tung R, Cameron R, Nagurney JT, Chae CU, Lloyd-Jones DM, Brown DF, Foran-Melanson S, Sluss PM, Lee-Lewandrowski E, Lewandrowski KB. The N-terminal Pro-BNP investigation of dyspnea in the emergency department (PRIDE) study. Am J Cardiol. 2005 Apr 15;95(8):948-54. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.12.032.
PMID: 15820160BACKGROUNDMcCullough PA, Nowak RM, McCord J, Hollander JE, Herrmann HC, Steg PG, Duc P, Westheim A, Omland T, Knudsen CW, Storrow AB, Abraham WT, Lamba S, Wu AH, Perez A, Clopton P, Krishnaswamy P, Kazanegra R, Maisel AS. B-type natriuretic peptide and clinical judgment in emergency diagnosis of heart failure: analysis from Breathing Not Properly (BNP) Multinational Study. Circulation. 2002 Jul 23;106(4):416-22. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000025242.79963.4c.
PMID: 12135939BACKGROUNDMoe GW, Howlett J, Januzzi JL, Zowall H; Canadian Multicenter Improved Management of Patients With Congestive Heart Failure (IMPROVE-CHF) Study Investigators. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide testing improves the management of patients with suspected acute heart failure: primary results of the Canadian prospective randomized multicenter IMPROVE-CHF study. Circulation. 2007 Jun 19;115(24):3103-10. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.666255. Epub 2007 Jun 4.
PMID: 17548729BACKGROUNDSteinhart B, Thorpe KE, Bayoumi AM, Moe G, Januzzi JL Jr, Mazer CD. Improving the diagnosis of acute heart failure using a validated prediction model. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Oct 13;54(16):1515-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.05.065.
PMID: 19815122BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Brian Steinhart, MD
Unity Health Toronto
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
David Mazer, MD
Unity Health Toronto
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Gordon Moe, MD
Unity Health Toronto
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Physician
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
September 1, 2010
First Posted
September 2, 2010
Study Start
September 1, 2010
Primary Completion
June 1, 2014
Study Completion
June 1, 2014
Last Updated
June 16, 2014
Record last verified: 2014-06