No abstract

Objectives To compare the outcomes and safety of a rapid access chest pain clinic (RACPC) in Australia with those of a general cardiology clinic. Design Prospective comparison of the outcomes for patients attending an RACPC and those of historical controls. Setting Royal Hobart Hospital cardiology outpatient department. Participants 1914 patients referred for outpatient evaluation of new onset chest pain (1479 patients seen in the RACPC, 435 patients previously seen in the general cardiology clinic). Main outcome measures Service outcomes (review times, number of clinic reviews); adverse events (unplanned emergency department re‐attendances at 30 days and 12 months; major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months, including unplanned revascularisation, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, cardiac death). Results Median time to review was shorter for RACPC than for usual care patients (12 days [IQR, 8–15 days] v 45 days [IQR, 27–89 days]). All patients seen in the RACPC received a diagnosis at the first clinic visit, but only 139 patients in the usual care group (32.0%). There were fewer unplanned emergency department re‐attendances for patients in the RACPC group at 30 days (1.6% v 4.4%) and 12 months (5.7% v 12.9%) than in the control group. Major adverse cardiovascular events were less frequent among patients evaluated in the RACPC (0.2% v 1.4%). Conclusions Patients were evaluated more efficiently in the RACPC than in a traditional cardiology clinic, and their subsequent rates of emergency department re‐attendances and adverse cardiovascular events were lower.

No abstract

S147 79

No abstract