BackgroundMany critical treatment decisions are based on the medical history of patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Discrepancies between the medical history documented by a health professional and the patient's own report may therefore have important health consequences.MethodsMedical histories of 117 patients with an ACS were documented. A questionnaire assessing the patient's health history was then completed by 62 eligible patients. Information about 13 health conditions with relevance to ACS management was obtained from the questionnaire and the medical record. Concordance between these two sources and reasons for discordance were identified.ResultsThere was significant variation in agreement, from very poor in angina (kappa < 0) to almost perfect in diabetes (kappa = 0.94). Agreement was substantial in cerebrovascular accident (kappa = 0.76) and hypertension (kappa = 0.73); moderate in cocaine use (kappa = 0.54), smoking (kappa = 0.46), kidney disease (kappa = 0.52) and congestive heart failure (kappa = 0.54); and fair in arrhythmia (kappa = 0.37), myocardial infarction (kappa = 0.31), other cardiovascular diseases (kappa = 0.37) and bronchitis/pneumonia (kappa = 0.31). The odds of agreement was 42% higher among individuals with at least some college education (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.00 - 2.01, p = 0.053). Listing of a condition in medical record but not in the questionnaire was a common cause of discordance.ConclusionDiscrepancies in aspects of the medical history may have important effects on the care of ACS patients. Future research focused on identifying the most effective and efficient means to obtain accurate health information may improve ACS patient care quality and safety.

Introduction: Hydroxyurea (HU) is a drug that targets the underlying pathophysiology of sickle cell disease (SCD); however, it continues to be an underutilized treatment for adults. Previous research suggests that HU treatment can result in fewer hospital contacts for acute vaso-occlusive pain crises (VOC). Hydroxyurea's impact on non-VOC pain, however, is not well established. Objectives: This study examined whether HU moderated patterns of static and dynamic pain processing and clinical pain in SCD individuals. Methods: Fifty-eight patients with SCD (N taking HU = 17) underwent quantitative sensory testing (QST) and completed twice daily symptom diaries for 12 weeks. Quantitative sensory testing established thermal threshold and tolerance, mechanical thresholds, and thermal and mechanical temporal summation of pain. Results: Groups did not differ in age, sex, or opioid use. After controlling for morphine use, QST results showed that participants taking HU had higher heat and mechanical pain thresholds (static QST measures) but not thermal and mechanical temporal summation (dynamic QST measures). Participants taking HU also reported lower VOC pain compared with SCD participants not taking HU; however, HU did not moderate non-VOC clinical pain ratings. Conclusion: Findings cautiously suggest that HU acts on pain hypersensitivity and VOC pain, rather than inhibiting pain facilitation and non-VOC pain. These differences may reflect HU's influence on peripheral rather than central sensitization. Future research is warranted to replicate these findings in a larger sample and determine whether early HU administration can prevent peripheral sensitization in SCD individuals.