Carole Michalski-Monnerat1,2, Pierre-Nicolas Carron3, Sylvain Nguyen4, Christophe Büla4, Cédric Mabire1. 1. Institute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare-IUFRS, University of Lausanne, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Neuchâtel Hospital Network, Neuchâtel, Switzerland. 3. Emergency Department, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Service of Geriatric Medicine and Geriatric Rehabilitation, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying vulnerable older patients admitted to an emergency department (ED) who are at increased risk for adverse events and require a comprehensive geriatric assessment remains a major challenge. The interRAI Emergency Department Screener (EDS) was developed for this specific purpose, but data regarding its validity are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) convergent validity of the EDS with results of a geriatrician's assessment in defining the need for prompt versus delayed/no further geriatric assessment and (2) predictive validity of the EDS for hospital admission, prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: ED of an academic hospital in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Older patients, aged 75 years or older (N = 202), who visited the ED over a 4-month period. Patients with life-threatening conditions were excluded. MEASUREMENTS: Data for EDS were collected by two clinical nurses. A brief geriatric assessment was performed separately and interpreted by a geriatrician blinded to the EDS results. Orientation after ED discharge, hospital LOS, and 30-day readmission were retrieved from the administrative database. RESULTS: Participants were aged 83.2 ± 5.4 years, 56.9% were female, and 43.6% lived alone. Frequent findings at geriatric assessment were impairment in gait/balance (69.3%), polypharmacy (64.9%), cognitive impairment/delirium (48.2%), risk of malnutrition (46.0%), and mood impairment (38.1%). The proportions of participants who required prompt, delayed, and no further geriatric assessment, according to the EDS, were 27.2%, 29.2%, and 43.6%, respectively. The EDS had low sensitivity in predicting hospital admission (28.8%), prolonged LOS (26.3%), and 30-day readmission (26.1%), with the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) being 51.8%, 48.1%, and 49.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The EDS performed poorly in both convergent and predictive validity analyses, precluding its use as a screening tool in this ED environment. Further efforts should be undertaken to better target interventions to reduce adverse health trajectories in the older ED population.
BACKGROUND: Identifying vulnerable older patients admitted to an emergency department (ED) who are at increased risk for adverse events and require a comprehensive geriatric assessment remains a major challenge. The interRAI Emergency Department Screener (EDS) was developed for this specific purpose, but data regarding its validity are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) convergent validity of the EDS with results of a geriatrician's assessment in defining the need for prompt versus delayed/no further geriatric assessment and (2) predictive validity of the EDS for hospital admission, prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: ED of an academic hospital in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Older patients, aged 75 years or older (N = 202), who visited the ED over a 4-month period. Patients with life-threatening conditions were excluded. MEASUREMENTS: Data for EDS were collected by two clinical nurses. A brief geriatric assessment was performed separately and interpreted by a geriatrician blinded to the EDS results. Orientation after ED discharge, hospital LOS, and 30-day readmission were retrieved from the administrative database. RESULTS:Participants were aged 83.2 ± 5.4 years, 56.9% were female, and 43.6% lived alone. Frequent findings at geriatric assessment were impairment in gait/balance (69.3%), polypharmacy (64.9%), cognitive impairment/delirium (48.2%), risk of malnutrition (46.0%), and mood impairment (38.1%). The proportions of participants who required prompt, delayed, and no further geriatric assessment, according to the EDS, were 27.2%, 29.2%, and 43.6%, respectively. The EDS had low sensitivity in predicting hospital admission (28.8%), prolonged LOS (26.3%), and 30-day readmission (26.1%), with the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) being 51.8%, 48.1%, and 49.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The EDS performed poorly in both convergent and predictive validity analyses, precluding its use as a screening tool in this ED environment. Further efforts should be undertaken to better target interventions to reduce adverse health trajectories in the older ED population.
Authors: Cheng-Fu Lin; Po-Chen Lin; Sung-Yuan Hu; Yu-Tse Tsan; Wei-Kai Liao; Shih-Yi Lin; Tzu-Chieh Lin Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 3.390