EBQ:San Francisco Syncope Rule: Difference between revisions

Line 19: Line 19:


==Conclusion==
==Conclusion==
*The San Francisco Syncope Rule demonstrated to be highly sensitive (98% sensitivity, 95% CI 89-100%) but not very specific (56%, 95% CI 52-60%) for predicting serious outcomes.


==Major Points==
==Major Points==

Revision as of 17:54, 24 August 2014

Under Review Journal Club Article
Quinn J. et al.. "Prospective validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with serious outcomes". Ann Emerg Med. 2006. 31(26):2992-6.
PubMed Full text PDF

Clinical Question

Can the San Francisco Syncope Rule be used in clinical practice to risk stratify patients presenting with syncope?

Conclusion

  • The San Francisco Syncope Rule demonstrated to be highly sensitive (98% sensitivity, 95% CI 89-100%) but not very specific (56%, 95% CI 52-60%) for predicting serious outcomes.

Major Points

Criteria (CHESS Pneumonic)[1]

Study Design

  • A prospective cohort study
  • Consecutive patients with syncope or near syncope presenting to an emergency department of a large, urban teaching hospital were identified and enrolled from July 15, 2002 to August 31, 2004
  • Physicians prospectively applied the San Francisco Syncope Rule
    • Patient follow up performed to determine if the patient suffered a predefined serious outcome within 30 days of their ED visit
    • Physicians completed a short Web-based form and enrolled patients after their assessment
  • Study investigators reviewed all data forms in order to ensure the correct interpretation of the rule,

Population

Patient Demographics

  • 364 men, 427 females
  • Mean age: 61
  • Admitted: 469
  • Patients with serious outcomes after ED visit: 54 (6.8%)
    • Death: 3
    • Arrhythmia: 23
    • Myocardial Infarction: 11
    • Valvular Heart Disease: 1
    • Significant Hemorrhage: 7
    • TIA/Stroke: 3
    • Sepsis: 3
    • Admission after ED Discharge : 3

Inclusion Criteria

  • Consecutive patients presenting with syncope or near syncope without any of the predefined exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria

  • Trauma-related loss of consciousness
  • Alcohol-related loss of consciousness
  • Drug-related loss of consciousness
  • Definite seizure

Interventions

Outcomes

Primary Outcome

Secondary Outcomes

Subgroup analysis

Criticisms & Further Discussion

Funding

  • A career development grant from the National Institutes of Health available to Dr. James Quinn, MD, MS, primary investigator of the study

Sources

  1. Quinn J, McDermott D, Stiell I, Kohn M, Wells G. Prospective validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with serious outcomes. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 May;47(5):448-54. PubMed PMID: 16631985.