Literature DB >> 14747812

Derivation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with short-term serious outcomes.

James V Quinn1, Ian G Stiell, Daniel A McDermott, Karen L Sellers, Michael A Kohn, George A Wells.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: The causes of syncope are usually benign but are occasionally associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We derive a decision rule that would predict patients at risk for short-term serious outcomes and help guide admission decisions.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted at a university teaching hospital and used emergency department (ED) patients presenting with syncope or near syncope. Physicians prospectively completed a structured data form when evaluating patients with syncope. Serious outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, pulmonary embolism, stroke, subarachnoid hemorrhage, significant hemorrhage, or any condition causing a return ED visit and hospitalization for a related event) were defined at the start of the study. All patients were followed up to determine whether they had experienced a serious outcome within 7 days of their ED visit. Univariate analysis was performed with chi2 and nonparametric techniques on all predictor variables. kappa Analysis was performed on variables requiring interpretation. Variables with kappa more than 0.5 and a P value less than.1 were analyzed with recursive partitioning techniques to develop a rule that would maximize the determination of serious outcomes.
RESULTS: There were 684 visits for syncope, and 79 of these visits resulted in patients' experiencing serious outcomes. Of the 50 predictor variables considered, 26 were associated with a serious outcome on univariate analysis. A rule that considers patients with an abnormal ECG, a complaint of shortness of breath, hematocrit less than 30%, systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg, or a history of congestive heart failure has 96% (95% confidence interval [CI] 92% to 100%) sensitivity and 62% (95% CI 58% to 66%) specificity. If applied to this cohort, the rule has the potential to decrease the admission rate by 10%.
CONCLUSION: The San Francisco Syncope Rule derived in this cohort of patients appears to be sensitive for identifying patients at risk for short-term serious outcomes. If prospectively validated, it may offer a tool to aid physician decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14747812     DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(03)00823-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  77 in total

1.  Current issues with prediction rules for syncope.

Authors:  Steve W Parry
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-09-26       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Incidence and outcome of first syncope in primary care: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Peter Vanbrabant; Jean Bernard Gillet; Frank Buntinx; Stefaan Bartholomeeusen; Bert Aertgeerts
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 2.497

3.  Syncope: the emergency department and beyond.

Authors:  Catriona Williamson; Matthew James Reed
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 3.397

4.  Syncope clinical management in the emergency department: a consensus from the first international workshop on syncope risk stratification in the emergency department.

Authors:  Giorgio Costantino; Benjamin C Sun; Franca Barbic; Ilaria Bossi; Giovanni Casazza; Franca Dipaola; Daniel McDermott; James Quinn; Matthew J Reed; Robert S Sheldon; Monica Solbiati; Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy; Daniel Beach; Nicolai Bodemer; Michele Brignole; Ivo Casagranda; Attilio Del Rosso; Piergiorgio Duca; Greta Falavigna; Shamai A Grossman; Roberto Ippoliti; Andrew D Krahn; Nicola Montano; Carlos A Morillo; Brian Olshansky; Satish R Raj; Martin H Ruwald; Francois P Sarasin; Win-Kuang Shen; Ian Stiell; Andrea Ungar; J Gert van Dijk; Nynke van Dijk; Wouter Wieling; Raffaello Furlan
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  Patterns and preexisting risk factors of 30-day mortality after a primary discharge diagnosis of syncope or near syncope.

Authors:  Stephen F Derose; Gelareh Z Gabayan; Vicki Y Chiu; Benjamin C Sun
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.451

6.  Guidelines and rules: friend or foe?

Authors:  Jonathan Adler
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2007-01-22

7.  Emergency department management of syncope: need for standardization and improved risk stratification.

Authors:  Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy; Monica Taljaard; Ian G Stiell; Marco L A Sivilotti; Heather Murray; Aparna Vaidyanathan; Brian H Rowe; Lisa A Calder; Eddy Lang; Andrew McRae; Robert Sheldon; George A Wells
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.397

8.  Measuring quality of care in syncope: case definition affects reported electrocardiogram use but does not bias reporting.

Authors:  Jeremiah D Schuur; Amy Justice
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.451

9.  Artificial neural networks and risk stratification in emergency departments.

Authors:  Greta Falavigna; Giorgio Costantino; Raffaello Furlan; James V Quinn; Andrea Ungar; Roberto Ippoliti
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 3.397

10.  Syncope and mortality: the critical component of the pathway or an innocent bystander?

Authors:  Satish R Raj
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 6.343

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.