We would like to thank the local research teams that contributed to the study, including Ruth Bowles, Jo Roberts, Alan Davies, Helen Kingsland, Linda Wadey, Petra Bijsterveld, Kathryn Somers, Richard Gillott, Lesley Davies, Stephen Hiles, Stephen Morris and Clare Fagan. We would also like to thank Danielle Bargo, for contributions towards the health economic models, and Alice Redfern, who assisted with the literature searching for the economic models. In addition, we would like to thank the SSC, including John Walsh, the chairperson of the committee, and our colleagues Lynn Cook, Peter Brindle, Emma Hopkins and Andreas Baumbach for their contributions to the research. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution made by the expert cardiology panel for the consensus process.
This study was designed and delivered in collaboration with the Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, a UK Clinical Research Collaboration-registered clinical trials unit that, as part of the Bristol Trials Centre, is in receipt of National Institute for Health Research clinical trials unit support funding.
Contributions of authors
Jessica M Harris undertook the data handling, linkage and analysis, and prepared the tables and figures for the report.
Rachel C Brierley conducted the study and conceived some aspects of data collection from participating hospitals.
Maria Pufulete designed and conducted the study, determined the structure of the consensus process, conducted the literature review and wrote the report.
Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci conceived the original research question and provided clinical and CMR expertise.
Elizabeth A Stokes carried out the health economic analyses and wrote the health economics sections of the report.
John P Greenwood was principal investigator at one of the recruiting hospitals, provided cardiology and CMR expertise and was a member of the working group in the consensus process.
Stephen H Dorman was principal investigator at one of the recruiting hospitals, provided cardiology expertise and was a member of the working group in the consensus process.
Richard A Anderson was principal investigator at one of the recruiting hospitals, provided cardiology expertise and was a member of the working group in the consensus process.
Chris A Rogers provided guidance with respect to statistics and study design.
Sarah Wordsworth provided guidance and oversaw the health economics analysis.
Sunita Berry was a member of the working group in the consensus process and provided expertise with respect to NHS commissioning of services.
Barnaby C Reeves was chief investigator with overall responsibility for the study, designed the study and provided strategic direction with the interpretation of study results.
Publications
Pufulete M, Brierley RC, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Greenwood JP, Dorman S, Anderson RA, et al. Formal consensus to identify clinically important changes in management resulting from the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients who activate the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) pathway. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014627.
Brierley RC, Pufulete M, Harris J, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Greenwood JP, Dorman S, et al. Developing a UK registry to investigate the role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients who activate the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) pathway: a multicentre, feasibility study linking routinely collected electronic patient data. BMJ Open 2018;8:e018987.
Stokes A, Doble B, Pufulete M, Reeves BC, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Dorman S, et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in emergency patients with multi-vessel disease or unobstructed coronary arteries: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the UK. BMJ Open 2019;9:e025700.
Pufulete M, Harris J, Dorman S, Cook L, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Greenwood JP, et al. Feasibility of identifying important changes in care management resulting from cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) using Hospital Episode Statistics data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; in press.
Data-sharing statement
Anonymised individual patient data (excluding hospital episode/vital status linked data) may be available for secondary research, conditional on assurance from the secondary researcher that the proposed use of the data is compliant with the Medical Research Council Policy on Data Preservation and Sharing regarding scientific quality, ethics requirements and value for money. All data requests should be submitted to the corresponding author for consideration and access may be granted following review. The hospital episode data/vital status data cannot be shared further due to conditions imposed by NHS Digital in the original data-sharing agreement that covered initial data release.
Patient data
This work uses data provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support. Using patient data is vital to improve health and care for everyone. There is huge potential to make better use of information from people’s patient records, to understand more about disease, develop new treatments, monitor safety, and plan NHS services. Patient data should be kept safe and secure, to protect everyone’s privacy, and it’s important that there are safeguards to make sure that it is stored and used responsibly. Everyone should be able to find out about how patient data are used. #datasaveslives You can find out more about the background to this citation here: https://understandingpatientdata.org.uk/data-citation.
Disclaimers
This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health and Social Care. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health and Social Care.