Syncope - Costly, Low-Yield Tests to Avoid

Written by Clay Smith

Spoon Feed
The higher cost, lower yield tests to consider avoiding for patients ≥60 with syncope were: EEG, head CT, MRA, cardiac stress test, and EP study.

Why does this matter?
Syncope is a target diagnosis for Medicare to retrospectively audit and decide an admission was "unnecessary."  Given that in this cohort alone the serious 30-day adverse event rate was 25.1%, including such things as MI, stroke, major hemorrhage, SAH, etc, it seems a bit "armchair quarterback-ish" for Medicare to do this.  Regardless, there are some low-yield diagnostic tests that may be targets for cost reduction.

DFO (done fell out) workup
This was a prospective multicenter study of 3686 patients ≥60 with syncope or presyncope.  The goal was to observe the variability, frequency, yield, and cost of the workup.  All patients had a standardized H&P + ECG.  Ironically, the second lowest yield test was ECG, with only 1.9% of tests abnormal, just behind troponin at 1.3%.  Coronary angiography was infrequently done but had the highest overall proportion of abnormal results at 42%.  The most commonly ordered test was troponin in 88%.  The most widely variable from hospital to hospital was carotid ultrasound.  The most expensive when considering cost per abnormal test was electrophysiology (EP) study at $39,703 per abnormal test.  The highest total expense was echocardiogram at $672,648.  Of the top 5 tests ordered, echo had the highest proportion of abnormal results at 22%.  The biggest outliers in cost per abnormal result were cardiac stress tests, coronary angiogram, EEG, MRA, and EP study.  The higher cost, lower yield tests to consider avoiding without a compelling indication were: EEG, head CT, MRA, cardiac stress test, and EP study. Here is a table sorted by percent with an abnormal finding from lowest to highest.

 
Screen Shot 2018-08-26 at 3.47.58 PM.png
 

Source
Variation in diagnostic testing for older patients with syncope in the emergency department.  Am J Emerg Med. 2018 Jul 23. pii: S0735-6757(18)30623-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2018.07.043. [Epub ahead of print]
Open in Read by QxMD

Reviewed by Thomas Davis

Member Login
Welcome, (First Name)!

Forgot? Show
Log In
Enter Member Area
My Profile Sign up to get full access. Log Out