scholarly journals Early warning scores and critical care transfer – patient heterogeneity, low sensitivity, high mortality

Author(s):  
Claire C. Nestor ◽  
Maria Donnelly ◽  
Siobhán Connors ◽  
Patricia Morrison ◽  
John Boylan

Abstract Background Emergency warning systems (EWS) are becoming a standard of care, but have unproven screening value in early critical illness. Similarly, emergency response team (ERT) care is of uncertain value. These questions are most controversial in mixed patient populations, where screening performance might vary, and intensivist-led ERT care might divert resources from existing patients. Aims To examine triggering events, disposition and outcome data for an intensivist-staffed EWS-ERT system. Methods We analysed process and outcome data over three years, classing EWS-triggered patients into three categories (non-escalated, escalated ward care and critical care transfer). The relationships between EWS data, pre-triggering clinical data, and patient disposition and outcome were examined. Results There were 1675 calls in 1190 patients. Most occurred later during admission, with critical care transfer in a minority; the rest were followed by escalated or non-escalated ward care. Patients transferred to critical care had high mortality (40.3%); less than half of patient transfers occurred following triggering EWS score predicted overall hospital mortality, but not mortality after critical care. Conclusions In a diverse hospital population, most triggering patients did not receive critical care and most critical care transfers occurred without triggering. Triggering was an insensitive screening measure for critical illness, followed by poor outcome. Higher scores predicted higher probability of transfer, but not later mortality, suggesting that EWS is being used as a decision aid but is not a true severity of illness score. Other, non-EWS data are needed for earlier detection and for prioritizing access to critical care.

Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 745
Author(s):  
Wenjuan Cong ◽  
Ak Narayan Poudel ◽  
Nour Alhusein ◽  
Hexing Wang ◽  
Guiqing Yao ◽  
...  

This scoping review provides new evidence on the prevalence and patterns of global antimicrobial use in the treatment of COVID-19 patients; identifies the most commonly used antibiotics and clinical scenarios associated with antibiotic prescribing in the first phase of the pandemic; and explores the impact of documented antibiotic prescribing on treatment outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The review complies with PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews and the protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework. In the first six months of the pandemic, there was a similar mean antibiotic prescribing rate between patients with severe or critical illness (75.4%) and patients with mild or moderate illness (75.1%). The proportion of patients prescribed antibiotics without clinical justification was 51.5% vs. 41.9% for patients with mild or moderate illness and those with severe or critical illness. Comparison of patients who were provided antibiotics with a clinical justification with those who were given antibiotics without clinical justification showed lower mortality rates (9.5% vs. 13.1%), higher discharge rates (80.9% vs. 69.3%), and shorter length of hospital stay (9.3 days vs. 12.2 days). In the first 6 months of the pandemic, antibiotics were prescribed for COVID-19 patients regardless of severity of illness. A large proportion of antibiotic prescribing for mild and moderate COVID-19 patients did not have clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection. Antibiotics may not be beneficial to COVID-19 patients without clinical evidence of a bacterial co-infection.


2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirijam Hall ◽  
David Endress ◽  
Susanne Hölbfer ◽  
Barbara Maier

AbstractObjectivesTo report clinical data on maternal outcome, mode of delivery and immediate neonatal outcome in women infected with COVID-19.MethodsRetrospective data collection.ResultsA total of 8.6% of the total population of hospitalised SARS-CoV-2 positive pregnant women were admitted to a critical care unit. The premature birth rate for births before 34+0 weeks of gestation among pregnant women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 7.1%. One newborn (3.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 two days after birth and showed symptoms.ConclusionsPregnant women with COVID-19 seem to be at higher risk of invasive ventilation, admission to a critical care unit and preterm birth, and should therefore be considered a high-risk-population.


2012 ◽  
Vol 112 (8) ◽  
pp. 1138-1146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiu-Hua Huang ◽  
Sue-Joan Chang ◽  
Chien-Wei Hsu ◽  
Tzu-Ming Chang ◽  
Shiu-Ping Kang ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Monkhouse

SummaryAs the proportion of elderly people in the general population increases, so does the number admitted to critical care. In caring for an older patient, the intensivist has to balance the complexities of an acute illness, pre-existing co-morbidities and patient preference for life-sustaining treatment with the chances of survival, quality of life after critical illness and rationing of expensive, limited resources. This remains one of the most challenging areas of critical care practice.


2021 ◽  

Critically ill paediatric transfers have expanded rapidly over the past ten years and, as such, the need for transfer teams to recognise, understand and treat the various illnesses that they encounter is greater than ever. This highly illustrated book covers a multitude of clinical presentations in a case-based format to allow an authentic feel to the transfer process. Written by clinicians with experience in thousands of transfers, it brings together many years of experience from a world-renowned hospital. Following the case from initial presentation, to resuscitation and referral and finally with the transfer itself; the book explores the clinical stabilisation, human factors decisions and logistical challenges that are encountered every day by these teams. Following the entire journey, this is an ideal resource for all professionals who may be involved in critical care transfer and retrieval medicine, particularly those working in paediatrics, emergency medicine, anaesthesiology, intensive care, or pre-hospital settings.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anoop Mayampurath ◽  
Christopher Ward ◽  
John Fahrenbach ◽  
Cynthia LaFond ◽  
Michael Howell ◽  
...  

Objective: To investigate whether a patient’s proximity to the nurse’s station or ward entrance at time of admission was associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes. Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adult inpatients to 13 medical–surgical wards at an academic hospital from 2009 to 2013. Proximity of admission room to the nurse’s station and to the ward entrance was measured using Euclidean distances. Outcomes of interest include development of critical illness (defined as cardiac arrests or transfer to an intensive care unit), inhospital mortality, and increase in length of stay (LOS). Results: Of the 83,635 admissions, 4,129 developed critical illness and 1,316 died. The median LOS was 3 days. After adjusting for admission severity of illness, ward, shift, and year, we found no relationship between proximity at admission to nurse’s station our outcomes. However, patients admitted to end of the ward had higher risk of developing critical illness (odds ratio [ OR] = 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.08, 1.23]), mortality ( OR = 1.16, 95% CI [1.03, 1.33]), and a higher LOS (13-hr increase, 95% CI [10, 15] hours) compared to patients admitted closer to the ward entrance. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses adjusting for isolation room patients and considering patients without room transfers in the first 48 hr. Conclusions: Our study suggests that being away from the nurse’s station did not increase the risk of these adverse events in ward patients, but being farther from the ward entrance was associated with increase in risk of adverse outcomes. Patient safety can be improved by recognizing this additional risk factor.


2020 ◽  
pp. 088506662096790
Author(s):  
Neha N. Goel ◽  
Matthew S. Durst ◽  
Carmen Vargas-Torres ◽  
Lynne D. Richardson ◽  
Kusum S. Mathews

Purpose: Timely recognition of critical illness is associated with improved outcomes, but is dependent on accurate triage, which is affected by system factors such as workload and staffing. We sought to first study the effect of delayed recognition on patient outcomes after controlling for system factors and then to identify potential predictors of delayed recognition. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Emergency Department (ED) patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) directly from the ED or within 48 hours of ED departure. Cohort characteristics were obtained through electronic and standardized chart abstraction. Operational metrics to estimate ED workload and volume using census data were matched to patients’ ED stays. Delayed recognition of critical illness was defined as an absence of an ICU consult in the ED or declination of ICU admission by the ICU team. We employed entropy-balanced multivariate models to examine the association between delayed recognition and development of persistent organ dysfunction and/or death by hospitalization day 28 (POD+D), and multivariable regression modeling to identify factors associated with delayed recognition. Results: Increased POD+D was seen for those with delayed recognition (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.13-2.92). When the delayed recognition was by the ICU team, the patient was 2.61 times more likely to experience POD+D compared to those for whom an ICU consult was requested and were accepted for admission. Lower initial severity of illness score (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.53) was predictive of delayed recognition. The odds for delayed recognition decreased when ED workload is higher (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89) compared to times with lower ED workload. Conclusions: Increased POD+D is associated with delayed recognition. Patient and system factors such as severity of illness and ED workload influence the odds of delayed recognition of critical illness and need further exploration.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document