Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
2002 ACC/AHA guideline versus clinician judgment as diagnostic tests for chest pain
Stephen M Hagberg1, Finbar Woitalla, Paul Crawford
1Misawa Air Base, Japan.
Insights
Clinical judgment and ACC/AHA guidelines effectively identify low-risk chest pain patients. This allows for safe emergency department discharge, reducing hospital admissions for chest pain and healthcare costs.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Emergency Medicine
- Clinical Diagnostics
Background:
- Hospital admissions for chest pain are frequent, leading to significant healthcare expenditures.
- Objective criteria for hospital admission may reduce costs associated with chest pain management.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the 2002 ACC/AHA guidelines with clinical judgment in predicting positive cardiac troponin-I in chest pain patients.
- To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of these methods in identifying patients who require hospitalization.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients admitted for chest pain over two years.
- Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for ACC/AHA guidelines and clinical judgment in predicting elevated cardiac troponin-I.
Main Results:
- Both ACC/AHA guidelines and clinical judgment demonstrated 100% sensitivity for predicting positive cardiac troponin-I.
- Specificity was 13% for ACC/AHA guidelines and 48% for clinical judgment.
- Low-risk classification by either method yielded a high negative predictive value (1.00).
Conclusions:
- Patients classified as low risk using either ACC/AHA guidelines or clinical judgment can likely be safely discharged from the emergency department.
- This approach may help reduce unnecessary hospitalizations for chest pain.
Purpose:
Hospital admissions for chest pain are frequent and costly. The use of objective criteria to determine the need for hospitalization may save money. Here we compare the 2002 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina and nonST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to clinical judgment as diagnostic tests to predict which patients with chest pain will develop positive cardiac troponin-I.
Methods:
Researchers conducted a retrospective chart review of patients admitted to a military community hospital for chest pain over a 2-year period. The study determined sensitivity and specificity for both the ACC/AHA guidelines and consensus of clinical judgment to predict which subjects would develop positive cardiac troponin-I.
Results:
Positive cardiac troponin-I was very low (7 of 386). Both the ACC/AHA guidelines and clinical judgment had sensitivities of 100% (95% CI, 65-100) to predict positive cardiac troponin-I. The ACC/AHA guideline was 13% specific (95% CI, 12-13), with clinical judgment at 48% (95% CI, 47-48). Classification as low risk had a high negative predictive value (ACC/AHA guideline, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95-1.00]; clinical judgment, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.99-1.00]).
Conclusion:
Patients categorized as low risk by either method could probably be discharged from the emergency department without developing positive troponin-I.
Related Concept Videos
Angina III: Clinical Manifestations and Assessment
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Atherosclerosis II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Tests
Acute Coronary Syndrome II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
Angina II: Classification
Aneurysm II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies

