Literature DB >> 31567342

Validation of Early Warning Scores at Two Long-Term Acute Care Hospitals.

Matthew M Churpek1, Kyle A Carey1, Nino Dela Merced2, James Prister2, John Brofman2, Dana P Edelson1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Early warning scores were developed to identify high-risk patients on the hospital wards. Research on early warning scores has focused on patients in short-term acute care hospitals, but there are other settings, such as long-term acute care hospitals, where these tools could be useful. However, the accuracy of early warning scores in long-term acute care hospitals is unknown.
DESIGN: Observational cohort study.
SETTING: Two long-term acute care hospitals in Illinois from January 2002 to September 2017. PATIENTS: Admitted adult long-term acute care hospital patients.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Demographic characteristics, vital signs, laboratory values, nursing flowsheet data, and outcomes data were collected from the electronic health record. The accuracy of individual variables, the Modified Early Warning Score, the National Early Warning Score version 2, and our previously developed electronic Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage score were compared for predicting the need for acute hospital transfer or death using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 12,497 patient admissions were included, with 3,550 experiencing the composite outcome. The median age was 65 (interquartile range, 54-74), 46% were female, and the median length of stay in the long-term acute care hospital was 27 days (interquartile range, 17-40 d), with an 8% in-hospital mortality. Laboratory values were the best predictors, with blood urea nitrogen being the most accurate (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.63) followed by albumin, bilirubin, and WBC count (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.61). Systolic blood pressure was the most accurate vital sign (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.60). Electronic Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.72) was significantly more accurate than National Early Warning Score version 2 (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.66) and Modified Early Warning Score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.65; p < 0.01 for all pairwise comparisons).
CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study, we found that the electronic Cardiac Arrest Risk Triage score was significantly more accurate than Modified Early Warning Score and National Early Warning Score version 2 for predicting acute hospital transfer and mortality. Because laboratory values were more predictive than vital signs and the average length of stay in an long-term acute care hospital is much longer than short-term acute hospitals, developing a score specific to the long-term acute care hospital population would likely further improve accuracy, thus allowing earlier identification of high-risk patients for potentially life-saving interventions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31567342      PMCID: PMC6861692          DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  15 in total

1.  Validation of a modified Early Warning Score in medical admissions.

Authors:  C P Subbe; M Kruger; P Rutherford; L Gemmel
Journal:  QJM       Date:  2001-10

2.  Long-term acute care hospital utilization after critical illness.

Authors:  Jeremy M Kahn; Nicole M Benson; Dina Appleby; Shannon S Carson; Theodore J Iwashyna
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Hospital Readmission From Post-Acute Care Facilities: Risk Factors, Timing, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Robert E Burke; Emily A Whitfield; David Hittle; Sung-joon Min; Cari Levy; Allan V Prochazka; Eric A Coleman; Robert Schwartz; Adit A Ginde
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2015-12-20       Impact factor: 4.669

4.  Time to Treatment and Mortality during Mandated Emergency Care for Sepsis.

Authors:  Christopher W Seymour; Foster Gesten; Hallie C Prescott; Marcus E Friedrich; Theodore J Iwashyna; Gary S Phillips; Stanley Lemeshow; Tiffany Osborn; Kathleen M Terry; Mitchell M Levy
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-05-21       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  The epidemiology of chronic critical illness in the United States*.

Authors:  Jeremy M Kahn; Tri Le; Derek C Angus; Christopher E Cox; Catherine L Hough; Douglas B White; Sachin Yende; Shannon S Carson
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  Multicenter development and validation of a risk stratification tool for ward patients.

Authors:  Matthew M Churpek; Trevor C Yuen; Christopher Winslow; Ari A Robicsek; David O Meltzer; Robert D Gibbons; Dana P Edelson
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 7.  Risk stratification of hospitalized patients on the wards.

Authors:  Matthew M Churpek; Trevor C Yuen; Dana P Edelson
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  Predicting Intensive Care Unit Readmission with Machine Learning Using Electronic Health Record Data.

Authors:  Juan C Rojas; Kyle A Carey; Dana P Edelson; Laura R Venable; Michael D Howell; Matthew M Churpek
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2018-07

9.  Effect of an automated notification system for deteriorating ward patients on clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Christian P Subbe; Bernd Duller; Rinaldo Bellomo
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 9.097

10.  Combining National Early Warning Score With Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor (suPAR) Improves Risk Prediction in Acute Medical Patients: A Registry-Based Cohort Study.

Authors:  Line J H Rasmussen; Steen Ladelund; Thomas H Haupt; Gertrude E Ellekilde; Jesper Eugen-Olsen; Ove Andersen
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 7.598

View more
  4 in total

1.  The utility of MEWS for predicting the mortality in the elderly adults with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study with comparison to other predictive clinical scores.

Authors:  Lichun Wang; Qingquan Lv; Xiaofei Zhang; Binyan Jiang; Enhe Liu; Chaoxing Xiao; Xinyang Yu; Chunhua Yang; Lei Chen
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 2.984

2.  A Machine Learning Prediction Model of Respiratory Failure Within 48 Hours of Patient Admission for COVID-19: Model Development and Validation.

Authors:  Douglas Barnaby; Theodoros P Zanos; Siavash Bolourani; Max Brenner; Ping Wang; Thomas McGinn; Jamie S Hirsch
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 5.428

3.  Evaluation of a digital system to predict unplanned admissions to the intensive care unit: A mixed-methods approach.

Authors:  James Malycha; Oliver Redfern; Marco Pimentel; Guy Ludbrook; Duncan Young; Peter Watkinson
Journal:  Resusc Plus       Date:  2021-12-23

4.  One-on-one comparison between qCSI and NEWS scores for mortality risk assessment in patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Francisco Martín-Rodríguez; Ancor Sanz-García; Guillermo J Ortega; Juan F Delgado-Benito; Eduardo García Villena; Cristina Mazas Pérez-Oleaga; Raúl López-Izquierdo; Miguel A Castro Villamor
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 5.348

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.