scholarly journals LO60: Frailty and associated prognosis among older emergency department patients with suspected infection – a prospective, observational cohort study

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (S1) ◽  
pp. S29-S29 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Fernando ◽  
K. Guo ◽  
M. Lukasik ◽  
B. Rochwerg ◽  
D. Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Clinical Frailty Scale ◽  
Suspected Infection ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Emergency Department Patients

Introduction: Prognostication and disposition among older Emergency Department (ED) patients with suspected infection remains challenging. Frailty is increasingly recognized as a predictor of poor prognosis among critically ill patients, however its association with clinical outcomes among older ED patients with suspected infection is unknown. Methods: We conducted a multicentre prospective cohort study at two tertiary care EDs. We included older ED patients (≥ 75 years) presenting with suspected infection. Frailty at baseline (prior to index illness) was explicitly measured for all patients by the treating physicians using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). We defined frailty as a CFS 5-8. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. We used multivariable logistic regression to adjust for known confounders. We also compared the prognostic accuracy of frailty against the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria. Results: We enrolled 203 patients, of whom 117 (57.6%) were frail. Frail patients were more likely to develop septic shock (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.51) and more likely to die within 30 days of ED presentation (aOR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.02-5.24). Sensitivity for mortality was highest among the CFS (73.1%, 95% CI: 52.2-88.4), as compared to SIRS ≥ 2 (65.4%, 95% CI: 44.3-82.8) or qSOFA ≥ 2 (38.4, 95% CI: 20.2-59.4). Conclusion: Frailty is a highly prevalent prognostic factor that can be used to risk-stratify older ED patients with suspected infection. ED clinicians should consider screening for frailty in order to optimize disposition in this population.

Frailty and associated prognosis among older emergency department patients with suspected infection: A prospective, observational cohort study

CJEM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon M. Fernando ◽  
Kevin H. Guo ◽  
Matthew Lukasik ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Deborah J. Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Clinical Frailty Scale ◽  
Suspected Infection ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Emergency Department Patients ◽  
Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

ABSTRACTBackgroundPrognosis and disposition among older emergency department (ED) patients with suspected infection remains challenging. Frailty is increasingly recognized as a predictor of poor prognosis among critically ill patients; however, its association with clinical outcomes among older ED patients with suspected infection is unknown.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study at two tertiary care EDs. We included older ED patients (≥75 years) with suspected infection. Frailty at baseline (before index illness) was explicitly measured for all patients by the treating physicians using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). We defined frailty as a CFS 5–8. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. We used multivariable logistic regression to adjust for known confounders. We also compared the prognostic accuracy of frailty with the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) criteria.ResultsWe enrolled 203 patients, of whom 117 (57.6%) were frail. Frail patients were more likely to develop septic shock (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08–2.51) and more likely to die within 30 days of ED presentation (aOR 2.05; 95% CI, 1.02–5.24). Sensitivity for mortality was highest among the CFS (73.1%; 95% CI, 52.2–88.4), compared with SIRS ≥ 2 (65.4%; 95% CI, 44.3–82.8) or qSOFA ≥ 2 (38.4; 95% CI, 20.2–59.4).ConclusionsFrailty is a highly prevalent prognostic factor that can be used to risk-stratify older ED patients with suspected infection. ED clinicians should consider screening for frailty to optimize disposition in this population.

scholarly journals Prognostic accuracy of emergency department triage tools for adults with suspected COVID-19: The PRIEST observational cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Amanda Loban ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Organ Support ◽  
Good Sensitivity ◽  
Who Criteria ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Observational Cohort

Objectives: The World Health Organisation (WHO) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommend various triage tools to assist decision-making for patients with suspected COVID-19. We aimed to estimate the accuracy of triage tools for predicting severe illness in adults presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19 infection. Methods: We undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 EDs across the United Kingdom (UK). We collected data from people attending with suspected COVID-19 between 26 March 2020 and 28 May 2020, and used presenting data to determine the results of assessment with the following triage tools: the WHO algorithm, NEWS2, CURB-65, CRB-65, PMEWS and the swine flu adult hospital pathway (SFAHP). We used 30-day outcome data (death or receipt of respiratory, cardiovascular or renal support) to determine prognostic accuracy for adverse outcome. Results: We analysed data from 20892 adults, of whom 4672 (22.4%) died or received organ support (primary outcome), with 2058 (9.9%) receiving organ support and 2614 (12.5%) dying without organ support (secondary outcomes). C-statistics for the primary outcome were: CURB-65 0.75; CRB-65 0.70; PMEWS 0.77; NEWS2 (score) 0.77; NEWS2 (rule) 0.69; SFAHP (6-point) 0.70; SFAHP (7-point) 0.68; WHO algorithm 0.61. All triage tools showed worse prediction for receipt of organ support and better prediction for death without organ support. At the recommended threshold, PMEWS and the WHO criteria showed good sensitivity (0.96 and 0.95 respectively), at the expense of specificity (0.31 and 0.27 respectively). NEWS2 showed similar sensitivity (0.96) and specificity (0.28) when a lower threshold than recommended was used. Conclusion: CURB-65, PMEWS and NEWS2 provide good but not excellent prediction for adverse outcome in suspected COVID-19, and predicted death without organ support better than receipt of organ support. PMEWS, the WHO criteria and NEWS2 (using a lower threshold than usually recommended) provide good sensitivity at the expense of specificity.

scholarly journals Inappropriateness of Repeated Laboratory and Radiological Tests for Transferred Emergency Department Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 1342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérôme Bertrand ◽  
Christophe Fehlmann ◽  
Olivier Grosgurin ◽  
François Sarasin ◽  
Omar Kherad
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Laboratory Tests ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Emergency Department Patients ◽  
Radiological Procedures

Background: Laboratory and radiographic tests are often repeated during inter-hospital transfers from secondary to tertiary emergency departments (ED), despite available data from the sending structure. The aim of this study was to identify the proportion of repeated tests in patients transferred to a tertiary care ED, and to estimate their inappropriateness and their costs. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all adult patients transferred from one secondary care ED to a tertiary care ED during the year 2016 was carried out. The primary outcome was the redundancy (proportion of procedure repeated in the 8 h following the transfer, despite the availability of the previous results). Factors predicting the repetition of procedures were identified through a logistic regression analysis. Two authors independently assessed inappropriateness. Results: In 2016, 432 patients were transferred from the secondary to the tertiary ED, and 251 procedures were repeated: 179 patients (77.2%) had a repeated laboratory test, 34 (14.7%) a repeated radiological procedure and 19 (8.2%) both. Repeated procedures were judged as inappropriate for 197 (99.5%) laboratory tests and for 39 (73.6%) radiological procedures. Conclusion: Over half of the patients transferred from another emergency department had a repeated procedure. In most cases, these repeated procedures were considered inappropriate.

scholarly journals Clinical Value of Whole Blood Procalcitonin Using Point of Care Testing, Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score, C-Reactive Protein and Lactate in Emergency Department Patients with Suspected Infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo-Sun Shim ◽  
Young-Hoon Yoon ◽  
Jung-Youn Kim ◽  
Young-Duck Cho ◽  
Sung-Jun Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Whole Blood ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Suspected Infection ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Emergency Department Patients

We investigated the clinical value of whole blood procalcitonin using point of care testing, quick sequential organ failure assessment score, C-reactive protein and lactate in emergency department patients with suspected infection and assessed the accuracy of the whole blood procalcitonin test by point-of-care testing. Participants were randomly selected from emergency department patients who complained of a febrile sense, had suspected infection and underwent serum procalcitonin testing. Whole blood procalcitonin levels by point-of-care testing were compared with serum procalcitonin test results from the laboratory. Participants were divided into two groups—those with bacteremia and those without bacteremia. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of procalcitonin, lactate and Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores were investigated in each group. Area under receiving operating curve of C-reactive protein, lactate and procalcitonin for predicting bacteremia and 28-day mortality were also evaluated. Whole blood procalcitonin had an excellent correlation with serum procalcitonin. The negative predictive value of procalcitonin and lactate was over 90%. Area under receiving operating curve results proved whole blood procalcitonin to be fair in predicting bacteremia or 28-day mortality. In the emergency department, point-of-care testing of whole blood procalcitonin is as accurate as laboratory testing. Moreover, procalcitonin is a complementing test together with lactate for predicting 28-days mortality and bacteremia for patients with suspected infection.

scholarly journals Prognostic accuracy of emergency department triage tools for adults with suspected COVID-19: the PRIEST observational cohort study

2021 ◽  
pp. emermed-2020-210783
Author(s):  
Ben Thomas ◽  
Steve Goodacre ◽  
Ellen Lee ◽  
Laura Sutton ◽  
Matthew Bursnall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Observational Cohort Study ◽  
Early Warning Score ◽  
Organ Support ◽  
Good Sensitivity ◽  
Who Criteria ◽  
Prognostic Accuracy ◽  
Observational Cohort

BackgroundThe WHO and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend various triage tools to assist decision-making for patients with suspected COVID-19. We aimed to compare the accuracy of triage tools for predicting severe illness in adults presenting to the ED with suspected COVID-19.MethodsWe undertook a mixed prospective and retrospective observational cohort study in 70 EDs across the UK. We collected data from people attending with suspected COVID-19 and used presenting data to determine the results of assessment with the WHO algorithm, National Early Warning Score version 2 (NEWS2), CURB-65, CRB-65, Pandemic Modified Early Warning Score (PMEWS) and the swine flu adult hospital pathway (SFAHP). We used 30-day outcome data (death or receipt of respiratory, cardiovascular or renal support) to determine prognostic accuracy for adverse outcome.ResultsWe analysed data from 20 891 adults, of whom 4611 (22.1%) died or received organ support (primary outcome), with 2058 (9.9%) receiving organ support and 2553 (12.2%) dying without organ support (secondary outcomes). C-statistics for the primary outcome were: CURB-65 0.75; CRB-65 0.70; PMEWS 0.77; NEWS2 (score) 0.77; NEWS2 (rule) 0.69; SFAHP (6-point rule) 0.70; SFAHP (7-point rule) 0.68; WHO algorithm 0.61. All triage tools showed worse prediction for receipt of organ support and better prediction for death without organ support. At the recommended threshold, PMEWS and the WHO criteria showed good sensitivity (0.97 and 0.95, respectively) at the expense of specificity (0.30 and 0.27, respectively). The NEWS2 score showed similar sensitivity (0.96) and specificity (0.28) when a lower threshold than recommended was used.ConclusionCURB-65, PMEWS and the NEWS2 score provide good but not excellent prediction for adverse outcome in suspected COVID-19, and predicted death without organ support better than receipt of organ support. PMEWS, the WHO criteria and NEWS2 (using a lower threshold than usually recommended) provide good sensitivity at the expense of specificity.Trial registration numberISRCTN56149622.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document