Abstract Background Measurement of cardiac troponin (cTn) using high-sensitivity assays is recommended for the diagnosis of myocardial infarction. We determined sex-specific and uniform 99th percentile upper reference limits (URLs) using the new Elecsys® Troponin T high-sensitivity Gen 6 assay in a global, healthy reference range cohort. Methods Lithium-heparin plasma and serum samples were prospectively collected from apparently healthy individuals aged ≥20 years across 34 global sites in the United States, Europe, China, and Japan. cTnT was measured using the Troponin T high-sensitivity Gen 6 assay on the Cobas® e 801 analyzer. Exclusion criteria were defined according to the 2022 IFCC guidance. Uniform and sex-specific 99th percentile URLs and nonparametric 95% CIs were determined in plasma and serum separately and combined. Results The final study population comprised 4147 participants (52.5% female) with a median (25th–75th percentiles) age of 48.0 (33.0–59.0) years; 45.8%, 47.9%, 5.2%, and 1.1% were White, Asian, Black, and other/unknown, respectively. For sample matrices combined (n = 8294), 81.0% and 99.2% of cTnT values were above the limit of detection in females and males, respectively. Sex-specific 99th percentile URLs (95% CI) were 18 (16–23) ng/L for females and 32 (28–35) ng/L for males; the uniform 99th percentile URL was 27 (24–31) ng/L. URLs were comparable in plasma and serum samples. Conclusions This study determined sex-specific and uniform 99th percentile URLs for the Troponin T high-sensitivity Gen 6 assay that were comparable irrespective of the matrix used in a large, global, healthy reference population.
Ongoing and Focused Provider Performance Evaluations in Emergency Medicine: Current Practices and Modified Delphi to Guide Future Practice
The Joint Commission requires ongoing and focused provider performance evaluations (OPPEs/FPPEs). The authors aim to describe current approaches in emergency medicine (EM) and identify consensus-based best practice recommendations. An online survey was distributed to leaders in EM to gain insight into current practices. A modified Delphi approach was then used to develop consensus to recommend best practice. A variety of strategies are currently in use for OPPE/FPPE. “Peer reviewed cases with opportunity for improvement” was identified as a preferred metric for OPPE. Although the preference was for use of peer review in OPPE, a consistent and standard adoption of robust internal care review processes is needed to establish expected norms. National benchmarking is not available currently. This was a limited survey of self-identified leaders, and there is an opportunity for additional engagement of leaders in EM to identify a unified approach that appropriately relates to patient outcomes.