Skip to content

Assessment of Acute Disease to Reduce Imaging Costs

Quantitative Pretest Probability to Reduce Cardiopulmonary Imaging in the ED

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01059500
Acronym
QUAADRICs
Enrollment
550
Registered
2010-02-01
Start date
2010-01-31
Completion date
2013-02-28
Last updated
2023-03-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Acute Coronary Syndrome, Pulmonary Embolism

Keywords

Computer-derived, quantitative pretest probability (PTP), Overtesting, Radiation, Intravenous Contrast, Anticoagulation

Brief summary

Overtesting for Acute Coronary Syndrome(ACS) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE) in low risk Emergency Department(ED) patients can increase exposure of nondiseased patients to radiation, intravenous contrast and anticoagulation. This project addresses question of whether quantitative Pre-Test Probability(PTP) assessed from two validated web-based computer algorithms (the project webtool), can improve the diagnostic evaluation of adult patients with charted evidence of chest pain and dyspnea. After a validation phase, the main study will randomize patients to either the Standard care group or the Intervention group, which will receive the output of the ACS and PE webtool that includes the PTP estimates of ACS and PE and one of three recommendations regarding next steps: 1. No further testing, 2. Exclusion with a biomarker protocol, or 3. Immediate imaging +/- empiric anticoagulation.

Interventions

DEVICEWebtool

Webtool provides the numeric PTP estimate for ACS and PE, and one of three testing recommendations. For ACS, PTP \<2.5% with low clinical suspicion and available follow-up, no further testing; PTP 2.5 to 5.5%: obtain a troponin I measurement at presentation and 120 minutes later, and if both are normal, no further testing; PTP \>5.5%: proceed to provocative testing. For PE, PTP\<2.5% with low clinical suspicion and available follow-up, no further testing; PTP 2.5-10%, obtain a quantitative D-dimer and if normal, no further testing. PTP 10-20%, proceed directly to pulmonary vascular imaging, and if PTP\>20% consider empiric anticoagulation with heparin if no contraindications.

Sponsors

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
CollaboratorFED
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 99 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adult (\>17 years) ED patient reports a history of chest discomfort and new or worsened shortness of breath or breathing difficulty, documented in the written history of present illness or review of systems. * Patient must understand English or have a certified translator present. * Physician has ordered or plans to order a 12-lead electrocardiogram. * Patient indicates the site hospital was his or her hospital of choice in the event of return visit within 14 days. Randomization Exclusions * Positive urine cocaine test. * Incarceration within 14 days of enrollment. * Patient elopement from medical care (i.e., patients who leave against medical advice).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Efficiency--Mean Cost of CareDay 30Only costs at the enrollment hospital will be used, and only for patients who indicate that they did not visit any other hospital at the time of phone follow-up. Costs would exclude unexpected and unrelated events such as trauma. Additionally, estimated costs associated with the time required of the clinician to gather and enter the 17 variables are included.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Efficiency--Total Charge of Medical CareDay 30Amount charged for medical care.
Safety--Radiation Dose to the ChestDay 90in millisievert (mSv)
Effectiveness--Length of Stay in HospitalDay 7
Effectiveness--Length of Stay Emergency DepartmentDay 7

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

550 subjects signed consent. 8 subjects screenfailed. 1 subject withdrew consent. 541 subjects were randomized.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Webtool Output
The webtool output group will receive the numeric PTP estimate from webtool output.
264
Standard of Care/No Webtool Output
The control group will not receive the numeric PTP estimate.
277
Total541

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicWebtool OutputStandard of Care/No Webtool OutputTotal
Age, Continuous48 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15
49 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14
49 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
124 participants148 participants272 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Unkown or Not reported
140 participants129 participants269 participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
264 participants277 participants541 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
154 Participants149 Participants303 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
110 Participants128 Participants238 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 2642 / 277
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 2640 / 277
serious
Total, serious adverse events
34 / 26449 / 277

Outcome results

Primary

Efficiency--Mean Cost of Care

Only costs at the enrollment hospital will be used, and only for patients who indicate that they did not visit any other hospital at the time of phone follow-up. Costs would exclude unexpected and unrelated events such as trauma. Additionally, estimated costs associated with the time required of the clinician to gather and enter the 17 variables are included.

Time frame: Day 30

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Standard of Care/No Webtool OutputEfficiency--Mean Cost of Care3933 US DollarsStandard Deviation 12639
Webtool OutputEfficiency--Mean Cost of Care2761 US DollarsStandard Deviation 7965
Secondary

Effectiveness--Length of Stay Emergency Department

Time frame: Day 7

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Standard of Care/No Webtool OutputEffectiveness--Length of Stay Emergency Department5.7 HoursStandard Deviation 2.5
Webtool OutputEffectiveness--Length of Stay Emergency Department5.7 HoursStandard Deviation 3
Secondary

Effectiveness--Length of Stay in Hospital

Time frame: Day 7

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Standard of Care/No Webtool OutputEffectiveness--Length of Stay in Hospital31.7 hoursStandard Deviation 63.3
Webtool OutputEffectiveness--Length of Stay in Hospital27.1 hoursStandard Deviation 74.6
Secondary

Efficiency--Total Charge of Medical Care

Amount charged for medical care.

Time frame: Day 30

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Standard of Care/No Webtool OutputEfficiency--Total Charge of Medical Care16413 US DollarsStandard Deviation 38993
Webtool OutputEfficiency--Total Charge of Medical Care11916 US DollarsStandard Deviation 26288
Secondary

Safety--Radiation Dose to the Chest

in millisievert (mSv)

Time frame: Day 90

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Standard of Care/No Webtool OutputSafety--Radiation Dose to the Chest5.2 mSvStandard Deviation 7
Webtool OutputSafety--Radiation Dose to the Chest4.2 mSvStandard Deviation 6

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 10, 2026