↓ Skip to main content

How rapid is rapid? Exemplary results of real-life rapid rule-out troponin timing in troponin-positive acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation in two contrasting German chest…

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How rapid is rapid? Exemplary results of real-life rapid rule-out troponin timing in troponin-positive acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation in two contrasting German chest pain unit facilities
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40001-016-0206-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dieter Fischer, Friederike Remberg, Dirk Böse, Michael Lichtenberg, Philipp Kümpers, Pia Lebiedz, Hermann-Joseph Pavenstädt, Johannes Waltenberger, Frank Breuckmann

Abstract

To analyse the timing of cardiac troponin (cTn) measurements in high-risk and cTn-positive acute coronary syndromes without persistent ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) in two structurally different German chest pain units (CPUs), contrasting an urban university maximum care and a rural regional primary care facility. All patients encoded as NSTEMI during the year 2013 were retrospectively enrolled in two centres: site (I)-centre of maximum care in an urban university setting and site (II)-centre of primary care in a rural regional care setting. Data acquisition included time intervals from admission to baseline cTn and first and second cTn control as well as type and timing of invasive management. The median times (site I vs. site II) from admission to cTn result announcement were 26.5 vs. 33.0 min (p = 0.02) for baseline, 4 vs. 4 h (p = 0.43) for the first and 11.0 vs. 16.5 h (p = 0.03) for the second control. Timely announcement, as recommended by guidelines, was available in 86.9 % at baseline, 59.4 % for the first or 41.1 % for the second cTn control. Rates and timing of invasive management were independent from the time point of positive cTn announcement (p = 0.51 and p = 0.68, respectively). German CPUs provide timely identification of cTn-positive patients in a narrow and guideline-adherent time frame using a rapid rule-out protocol. Especially, baseline and early cTn timing was comparable between the urban university maximum care and the rural regional primary care facility without relevant impact on guideline-conforming invasive management, underlining the high standard of care in those highly professional institutions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Master 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Librarian 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 42%
Computer Science 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2016.
All research outputs
#5,604,771
of 7,408,484 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#124
of 194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,459
of 279,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,408,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.