Objectives To investigate whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) predicted short-term and long-term mortality in patients with a bloodstream infection visiting the emergency department (ED)... Show moreObjectives To investigate whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) predicted short-term and long-term mortality in patients with a bloodstream infection visiting the emergency department (ED) and compare it to the often-validated National Early Warning Score (NEWS). Design A retrospective cohort study. Setting A tertiary hospital in the Netherlands. Participants Adult patients attending the ED with a blood culture-proven infection between 2012 and 2017 were included. We collected the comorbidities from the CCI and the vital signs from the NEWS. Main outcomes Short-term mortality (30-day) and long-term mortality (1 year). We assessed the predictive performance by discrimination, expressed as the area under the curve (AUC). Results We included 1039 patients with a blood culture-proven infection. Mortality was 10.4% within 30 days and 27.8% within 1 year. On average patients had two comorbidities (ranging from 0 to 6). Highly prevalent comorbidities were malignancy (30.2%) and diabetes mellitus (20.5%). The predictive performance of the CCI was highest for 1-year mortality (AUC 0.696 (95%CI) (0.660 to 0.732)) and better compared with the NEWS (AUC (95% CI) 0.594 (0.555 to 0.632)). For prediction of 30-day mortality, the NEWS was superior (AUC (95% CI) 0.706 (0.656 to 0.756)) to the comorbidities of the CCI (AUC (95% CI) 0.568 (0.507 to 0.628)). Conclusions We found that presenting comorbidity (ie, the CCI) is most useful to prognosticate long-term outcome in patients with bloodstream infection in the ED. Short-term mortality is more accurately predicted by deviating vital signs (ie, the NEWS). Show less
Background: Length of stay (LOS) in the Emergency Department (ED) is correlated with an extended in-hospital LOS and may even increase 30-day mortality. Older patients represent a growing... Show moreBackground: Length of stay (LOS) in the Emergency Department (ED) is correlated with an extended in-hospital LOS and may even increase 30-day mortality. Older patients represent a growing population in the ED and they are especially at risk of adverse outcomes. Screening tools that adequately predict admission could help reduce waiting times in the ED and reduce time to treatment. We aimed to develop and validate a clinical prediction tool for admission, applicable to the aged patient population in the ED.Methods: Data from 7,606 ED visits of patients aged 70 years and older between 2012 and 2014 were used to develop the CLEARED tool. Model performance was assessed with discrimination using logistic regression and calibration. The model was internally validated by bootstrap resampling in Erasmus Medical Center and externally validated at two other hospitals, Medisch Spectrum Twente (MST) and Leiden University Medical Centre (LUMC).Results: CLEARED contains 10 predictors: body temperature, heart rate, diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, referral status, the Manchester Triage System category, and the need for laboratory or radiology testing. The internally validated area under the curve (AUC) was 0.766 (95% CI [0759; 0.780. External validation in MST showed an AUC of o.797 and in LUMC, an AUC of 0.725.Conclusions: The developed CLEARED tool reliably predicts admission in elderly patients visiting the ED. It is a promising prompt, although further research is needed to implement the tool and to investigate the benefits in terms of reduction of crowding and LOS in the ED. Show less
ObjectiveClinical practice universally assumes that appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy improves survival in patients with bloodstream infection. However, this is not generally supported by... Show moreObjectiveClinical practice universally assumes that appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy improves survival in patients with bloodstream infection. However, this is not generally supported by previous studies. We examined the association between appropriate therapy and 30-day mortality, while minimizing bias due to confounding by indication.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study between 2012 and 2017 at a tertiary university hospital in the Netherlands. Adult patients with bloodstream infection attending the emergency department were included. Based on in vitro susceptibility, antibiotic therapy was scored as appropriate or inappropriate. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. To control for confounding, we performed conventional multivariable logistic regression and propensity score methods. Additionally, we performed an analysis in a more homogeneous subgroup (i.e. antibiotic monotherapy).ResultsWe included 1.039 patients, 729 (70.2%) received appropriate therapy. Overall 30-day mortality was 10.4%. Appropriately treated patients had more unfavorable characteristics, indicating more severe illness. Despite adjustments, we found no association between appropriate therapy and mortality. For the antibiotic monotherapy subgroup (n = 449), patient characteristics were more homogeneous. Within this subgroup, appropriate therapy was associated with lower mortality (Odds Ratios [95% Confidence Intervals] ranging from: 0.31 [0.14; 0.67] to 0.40 [0.19; 0.85]).ConclusionsComparing heterogeneous treatment groups distorts associations despite use of common methods to prevent bias. Consequently, conclusions of such observational studies should be interpreted with care. If possible, future investigators should use our method of attempting to identify and analyze the most homogeneous treatment groups nested within their study objective, because this minimizes residual confounding. Show less
Background: Acutely hospitalised older patients with indications related to internal medicine have high risks of adverse outcomes. We investigated whether risk stratification using the Acutely... Show moreBackground: Acutely hospitalised older patients with indications related to internal medicine have high risks of adverse outcomes. We investigated whether risk stratification using the Acutely Presenting Older Patient (APOP) screening tool associates with clinical outcomes in this patient group.Methods: Patients aged >= 70 years who visited the Emergency Department (ED) and were acutely hospitalised for internal medicine were followed prospectively. The APOP screener assesses demographics, physical and cognitive function at ED presentation, and predicts 3-month mortality and functional decline in the older ED population. Patients with a predicted risk >= 45% were considered 'high risk'. Clinical outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse outcomes were mortality and functional decline, 3 and 12 months after hospitalisation.Results: We included 319 patients, with a median age of 80 (IQR 74-85) years, of whom 94 (29.5%) were categorised as 'high risk' by the APOP screener. These patients had a longer hospital LOS compared to 'low risk' patients (5 (IQR 3-10) vs. 3 (IQR 1-7) days, respectively; p = 0.006). At 3 months, adverse outcomes were more frequent in 'high risk' patients compared to 'low risk' patients (59.6% vs. 34.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). At 12 months, adverse outcomes (67.0% vs. 46.2%, respectively; p = 0.001) and mortality (48.9% vs. 28.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) were greater in 'high risk' compared to 'low risk' patients.Conclusion: The APOP screener identifies acutely hospitalised internal medicine patients at high risk for poor short and long-term outcomes. Early risk stratification at admission could aid in individualised treatment decisions to optimise outcomes for older patients. Show less
Objectives Delirium is a frequent problem among older patients in the emergency department (ED) and early detection is important to prevent its associated adverse outcomes. Several screening tools... Show moreObjectives Delirium is a frequent problem among older patients in the emergency department (ED) and early detection is important to prevent its associated adverse outcomes. Several screening tools for delirium have been proposed for the ED, such as the 6-Item Cognitive Impairment Test (6-CIT) and the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU (CAM-ICU). Previous validation of the CAM-ICU for use in the ED showed varying results, possibly because it was administered at different or unknown time points. The aim was to study the prevalence of delirium in older (>= 70 years) ED patients using the CAM-ICU and 6-CIT.Participants and methods A prospective cohort study was carried out in one tertiary care and one secondary care hospital in the Netherlands. Patients aged 70 years and older attending the ED were included. Delirium screening was performed within 1 h after ED registration using the CAM-ICU. The 6-CIT was determined for comparison using a cut-off point of at least 14 points indicating possible delirium.Results A total of 997 patients were included in the study, with a median age of 78 years (interquartile range 74-84). Delirium as assessed with CAM-ICU was positive in only 13 (1.3%, 95% confidence interval: 0.8-2.2) patients. Ninety-five (9.5% 95% confidence interval: 7.9-11.5) patients had 6-CIT more than or equal to 14.Conclusion We found a delirium prevalence of 1.3% using the CAM-ICU, which was much lower than the expected prevalence of around 10% as being frequently reported in the literature and what we found when using the 6-CIT. On the basis of these results, caution is warranted to use the CAM-ICU for early screening in the ED. (C) 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
