Dataset Information

Comparison of 30-Day Serious Adverse Clinical Events for Elderly Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Near-Syncope Versus Syncope.

ABSTRACT:

Study objective

Controversy remains in regard to the risk of adverse events for patients presenting with syncope compared with near-syncope. The purpose of our study is to describe the difference in outcomes between these groups in a large multicenter cohort of older emergency department (ED) patients.

Methods

From April 28, 2013, to September 21, 2016, we conducted a prospective, observational study across 11 EDs in adults (≥60 years) with syncope or near-syncope. A standardized data extraction tool was used to collect information during their index visit and at 30-day follow-up. Our primary outcome was the incidence of 30-day death or serious clinical events. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusting for relevant demographic or historical variables.

Results

A total of 3,581 patients (mean age 72.8 years; 51.6% men) were enrolled in the study. There were 1,380 patients (39%) presenting with near-syncope and 2,201 (61%) presenting with syncope. Baseline characteristics revealed a greater incidence of congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, previous arrhythmia, nonwhite race, and presenting dyspnea in the near-syncope compared with syncope cohort. There were no differences in the primary outcome between the groups (near-syncope 18.7% versus syncope 18.2%). A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified no difference in 30-day serious outcomes for patients with near-syncope (odds ratio 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.14) compared with syncope.

Conclusion

Near-syncope confers risk to patients similar to that of syncope for the composite outcome of 30-day death or serious clinical event.

SUBMITTER: Bastani A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6387841 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of 30-Day Serious Adverse Clinical Events for Elderly Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Near-Syncope Versus Syncope.

Bastani Aveh A Su Erica E Adler David H DH Baugh Christopher C Caterino Jeffrey M JM Clark Carol L CL Diercks Deborah B DB Hollander Judd E JE Malveau Susan E SE Nicks Bret A BA Nishijima Daniel K DK Shah Manish N MN Stiffler Kirk A KA Storrow Alan B AB Wilber Scott T ST Yagapen Annick N AN Weiss Robert E RE Sun Benjamin C BC

Annals of emergency medicine 20181207 3

<h4>Study objective</h4>Controversy remains in regard to the risk of adverse events for patients presenting with syncope compared with near-syncope. The purpose of our study is to describe the difference in outcomes between these groups in a large multicenter cohort of older emergency department (ED) patients.<h4>Methods</h4>From April 28, 2013, to September 21, 2016, we conducted a prospective, observational study across 11 EDs in adults (≥60 years) with syncope or near-syncope. A standardized ...[more]

PMID: 30529112

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe risk of short-term mortality after an emergency department (ED) visit for syncope is poorly understood, resulting in prognostic uncertainty and frequent hospital admission. The authors determined patterns and risk factors for short-term mortality after a diagnosis of syncope or near syncope to aid in medical decision-making.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed of adult members of Kaiser Permanente Southern California seen at 11 EDs from 2002 to 2006 with a primary discharge diagnosis of syncope or near syncope (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision [ICD-9] 780.2). The outcome was 30-day mortality. Proportional hazards time-to-event regression models were used to identify risk factors.ResultsThere were 22,189 participants with 23,951 ED visits, resulting in 307 deaths by 30 days. A relatively lower risk of death was reached within 2 weeks for ages 18 to 59 years, but not until 3 months or more for ages 60 and older. Preexisting comorbidities associated with increased mortality included heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] = 14.3 in ages 18 to 59 years, HR = 3.09 in ages 60 to 79 years, HR = 2.34 in ages 80 years plus; all p < 0.001), diabetes (HR = 1.49, p = 0.002), seizure (HR = 1.65, p = 0.016), and dementia (HR = 1.41, p = 0.034). If the index visit followed one or more visits for syncope in the previous 30 days, it was associated with increased mortality (HR = 1.86, p = 0.024). Absolute risk of death at 30 days was under 0.2% in those under 60 years without heart failure and more than 2.5% across all ages in those with heart failure.ConclusionsThe low risk of death after an ED visit for syncope or near syncope in patients younger than 60 years old without heart failure may be helpful when deciding who to admit for inpatient evaluation. The presence of one or more comorbidities that predict death and a prior visit for syncope should be considered in clinical decisions and risk stratification tools for patients with syncope. Close clinical follow-up seems advisable in patients 60 years and older due to a prolonged risk of death.

Project description:BACKGROUND: While Canadian ED physicians discharge most syncope patients with no specific further follow-up, approximately 5% will suffer serious outcomes after ED discharge. The goal of this study is to prospectively identify risk factors and to derive a clinical decision tool to accurately predict those at risk for serious outcomes after ED discharge within 30 days. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a prospective cohort study at 6 Canadian EDs to include adults with syncope and exclude patients with loss of consciousness>5 minutes, mental status changes from baseline, obvious witnessed seizure, or head trauma prior to syncope. Emergency physicians will collect standardized clinical variables including historical features, physical findings, and results of immediately available tests (blood, ECG, and ED cardiac monitoring) prior to ED discharge/hospital admission. A second emergency physician will evaluate approximately 10% of study patients for interobserver agreement calculation of predictor variables. The primary outcome will be a composite serious outcome occurring within 30 days of ED discharge and includes three distinct categories: serious adverse events (death, arrhythmia); identification of serious underlying disease (structural heart disease, aortic dissection, pulmonary embolism, severe pulmonary hypertension, subarachnoid hemorrhage, significant hemorrhage, myocardial infarction); or procedures to treat the cause of syncope. The secondary outcome will be any of the above serious outcomes either suspected or those occurring in the ED. A blinded Adjudication Committee will confirm all serious outcomes. Univariate analysis will be performed to compare the predictor variables in patients with and without primary outcome. Variables with p-values <0.2 and kappa values ? 0.60 will be selected for stepwise logistic regression to identify the risk factors and to develop the clinical decision tool. We will enroll 5,000 patients (with 125 positive for primary outcome) for robust identification of risk factors and clinical decision tool development. DISCUSSION: Once successfully developed, this tool will accurately risk-stratify adult syncope patients; however, validation and implementation will still be required. This program of research should lead to standardized care of syncope patients, and improve patient safety.

Project description:ObjectivesPublished literature on national emergency department (ED) revisit rates among older adults with dementia is sparse, despite anecdotal evidence of higher ED utilization. Thus we evaluated the odds ratio (OR) of 30-day ED revisits among older adults with dementia using a nationally representative sample.DesignWe assessed the frequency of claims associated with a 30-day ED revisit among Medicare beneficiaries with and without a dementia diagnosis before or at index ED visit. We used a logistic regression model controlling for dementia, age, sex, race, region, Medicaid status, transfer to a skilled nursing facility after ED, primary care physician use 12 months before index, and comorbidity.SettingA nationally representative sample of claims data for Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older who maintained continuous fee-for-service enrollment during 2015 and 2016. Only outpatient claims associated with an ED visit between January 2016 and November 2016 were included as a qualifying index encounter.ParticipantsWe identified 240 249 patients without dementia and 54 622 patients for whom a dementia code was recorded in the year before the index encounter in 2016.ResultsOur results indicate a significant difference in unadjusted 30-day ED revisit rates among those with an ED dementia diagnoses (22.0%) compared with those without (13.9%). Our adjusted results indicated that dementia is a significant predictor of 30-day ED revisits (P < .0001). Those with a dementia diagnosis at or before the index ED visit were more likely to have experienced an ED revisit within 30 days (OR = 1.27; 95% confidence interval = 1.24-1.31).ConclusionDementia diagnoses were a significant predictor of 30-day ED revisits. Further research should assess potential reasons why dementia is associated with markedly higher revisit rates, as well as opportunities to manage and transition dementia patients from the ED back to the community more effectively. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2254-2259, 2019.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to describe and analyse the performance statistics of validated risk scores identifying elderly inpatients at risk of early unplanned readmission.Data sourcesWe identified potentially eligible studies by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE and Web of Science. Our search was restricted to original studies, between 1966 and 2018.Eligibility criteriaOriginal studies, which internally or externally validated the clinical scores of hospital readmissions in elderly inpatients.Data extraction and synthesisA data extraction grid based on Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis statements was developed and completed by two reviewers to collect general data. The same process was used to extract metrological data of the selected scores.Quality assessment of the included studiesAssessment of the quality and risk of bias in individual studies was performed by two reviewers, using the validated Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment tool.ParticipantsElderly inpatients discharged to home from hospital or returning home after an accident and emergency department visit.ResultsA total of 12 studies and five different scores were included in the review. The five scores present area under the receiving operating characteristic curve between 0.445 and 0.69. Identification of Senior At Risk (ISAR) and Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) scores were the more frequently validated scores with ISAR being more sensitive and TRST more specific.ConclusionsThe TRST and ISAR scores have been extensively studied and validated. The choice of the most suitable score relies on available patient data, patient characteristics and the foreseen clinical care intervention. In order to pair the intervention with the appropriate clinical score, further studies of external validation of clinical scores, identifying elderly patients at risk of early unplanned readmission, are needed.Prospero registration numberCRD42017054516.

Project description:BackgroundUrgency triage in the emergency department (ED) is important for early identification of potentially lethal conditions and extensive resource utilization. However, in older patients, urgency triage systems could be improved by taking geriatric vulnerability into account. We investigated the association of geriatric vulnerability screening in addition to triage urgency levels with 30-day mortality in older ED patients.DesignSecondary analysis of the observational multicenter Acutely Presenting Older Patient (APOP) study.SettingEDs within four Dutch hospitals.ParticipantsConsecutive patients, aged 70 years or older, who were prospectively included.MeasurementsPatients were triaged using the Manchester Triage System (MTS). In addition, the APOP screener was used as a geriatric screening tool. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Comparison was made between mortality within the geriatric high- and low-risk screened patients in every urgency triage category. We calculated the difference in explained variance of mortality by adding the geriatric screener (APOP) to triage urgency (MTS) by calculating Nagelkerke R2 .ResultsWe included 2,608 patients with a median age of 79 (interquartile range = 74-84) years, of whom 521 (20.0%) patients were categorized as high risk according to geriatric screening. Patients were triaged on urgency as standard (27.2%), urgent (58.5%), and very urgent (14.3%). In total, 132 (5.1%) patients were deceased within a period of 30 days. Within every urgency triage category, 30-day mortality was threefold higher in geriatric high-risk compared to low-risk patients (overall = 11.7% vs 3.4%; P < .001). The explained variance of 30-day mortality with triage urgency was 1.0% and increased to 6.3% by adding the geriatric screener.ConclusionCombining triage urgency with geriatric screening has the potential to improve triage, which may help clinicians to deliver early appropriate care to older ED patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1755-1762, 2020.

Dataset Information

Comparison of 30-Day Serious Adverse Clinical Events for Elderly Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Near-Syncope Versus Syncope.

Study objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparison of 30-Day Serious Adverse Clinical Events for Elderly Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Near-Syncope Versus Syncope.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets