Characterization of older adults with cancer seeking acute emergency department care: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in care of older adults in cancer treatment trials and emergency department (ED) use exist. This report provides a baseline description of older adults ≥65 years old who present to the ED with active cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network observational ED cohort study sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. Of 1564 eligible adults with active cancer, 1075 patients were prospectively enrolled, of which 505 were ≥ 65 years old. We recruited this convenience sample from eighteen participating sites across the United States between February 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. RESULTS: Compared to cancer patients younger than 65 years of age, older adults were more likely to be transported to the ED by emergency medical services, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and be admitted despite no significant difference in acuity as measured by the Emergency Severity Index. Despite the higher admission rate, no significant difference was noted in hospitalization length of stay, 30-day mortality, ED revisit or hospital admission within 30 days after the index visit. Three of the top five ED diagnoses for older adults were symptom-related (fever of other and unknown origin, abdominal and pelvic pain, and pain in throat and chest). Despite this, older adults were less likely to report symptoms and less likely to receive symptomatic treatment for pain and nausea than the younger comparison group. Both younger and older adults reported a higher symptom burden on the patient reported Condensed Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale than to ED providers. When treating suspected infection, no differences were noted in regard to administration of antibiotics in the ED, admissions, or length of stay ≤2 days for those receiving ED antibiotics. DISCUSSION: We identified several differences between older (≥65 years old) and younger adults with active cancer seeking emergency care. Older adults frequently presented for symptom-related diagnoses but received fewer symptomatic interventions in the ED suggesting that important opportunities to improve the care of older adults with cancer in the ED exist.

Palliative Care Needs and Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Cancer in the Emergency Department.

Background: Older adults with cancer use the emergency department (ED) for acute concerns. Objectives: Characterize the palliative care needs and clinical outcomes of advanced cancer patients in the ED. Design: A planned secondary data analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN) data. Settings/Subjects: Cancer patients who presented to the 18 CONCERN affiliated EDs in the United States. Measurements: Survey included demographics, cancer type, functional status, symptom burden, palliative and hospice care enrollment, and advance directive code status. Results: Of the total (674/1075, 62.3%) patients had advanced cancer and most were White (78.6%) and female (50.3%); median age was 64 (interquartile range 54-71) years. A small proportion of them were receiving palliative (6.5% [95% confidence interval; CI 3.0-7.6]; p = 0.005) and hospice (1.3% [95% CI 1.0-3.2]; p = 0.52) care and had a higher 30-day mortality rate (8.3%, [95% CI 6.2-10.4]). Conclusions: Patients with advanced cancer continue to present to the ED despite recommendations for early delivery of palliative care.

High-dose intravenous vitamin C decreases rates of mechanical ventilation and cardiac arrest in severe COVID-19.

Intravenous vitamin C (IV-VitC) has been suggested as a treatment for severe sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, there are limited studies evaluating its use in severe COVID-19. Efficacy and safety of high-dose IV-VitC (HDIVC) in patients with severe COVID-19 were evaluated. This observational cohort was conducted at a single-center, 530 bed, community teaching hospital and took place from March 2020 through July 2020. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was utilized to compare outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 treated with and without HDIVC. Patients were enrolled if they were older than 18 years of age and were hospitalized secondary to severe COVID-19 infection, indicated by an oxygenation index < 300. Primary study outcomes included mortality, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and cardiac arrest. From a total of 100 patients enrolled, 25 patients were in the HDIVC group and 75 patients in the control group. The average time to death was significantly longer for HDIVC patients (P = 0.0139), with an average of 22.9 days versus 13.7 days for control patients. Patients who received HDIVC also had significantly lower rates of mechanical ventilation (52.93% vs. 73.14%; ORIPTW = 0.27; P = 0.0499) and cardiac arrest (2.46% vs. 9.06%; ORIPTW = 0.23; P = 0.0439). HDIVC may be an effective treatment in decreasing the rates of mechanical ventilation and cardiac arrest in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. A longer hospital stay and prolonged time to death may suggest that HDIVC may protect against clinical deterioration in severe COVID-19.

Utility of COVID-19 antigen testing in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc.) is a lateral flow immunochromatographic point-of-care test for the qualitative detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid protein antigen. It provides results from nasal swabs in 15 minutes. Our purpose was to determine its sensitivity and specificity for a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS: Eligible patients had symptoms of COVID-19 or suspected exposure. After consent, 2 nasal swabs were collected; 1 was tested using the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 (ie, the gold standard polymerase chain reaction test) and the second run on the BinaxNOW point of care platform by emergency department staff. RESULTS: From July 20 to October 28, 2020, 767 patients were enrolled, of which 735 had evaluable samples. Their mean (SD) age was 46.8 (16.6) years, and 422 (57.4%) were women. A total of 623 (84.8%) patients had COVID-19 symptoms, most commonly shortness of breath (n = 404; 55.0%), cough (n = 314; 42.7%), and fever (n = 253; 34.4%). Although 460 (62.6%) had symptoms ≤7 days, the mean (SD) time since symptom onset was 8.1 (14.0) days. Positive tests occurred in 173 (23.5%) and 141 (19.2%) with the gold standard versus BinaxNOW test, respectively. Those with symptoms >2 weeks had a positive test rate roughly half of those with earlier presentations. In patients with symptoms ≤7 days, the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values for the BinaxNOW test were 84.6%, 98.5%, 94.9%, and 95.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The BinaxNOW point-of-care test has good sensitivity and excellent specificity for the detection of COVID-19. We recommend using the BinasNOW for patients with symptoms up to 2 weeks.

Observation unit use among patients with cancer following emergency department visits: Results of a multicenter prospective cohort from CONCERN.

PURPOSE: Emergency department (ED) visits by patients with cancer frequently end in hospitalization. As concerns about ED and hospital crowding increase, observation unit care may be an important strategy to deliver safe and efficient treatment for eligible patients. In this investigation, we compared the prevalence and clinical characteristics of cancer patients who received observation unit care with those who were admitted to the hospital from the ED. METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with cancer presenting to an ED affiliated with one of 18 hospitals of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergency Research Network (CONCERN) between March 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. We compared patient characteristics with the prevalence of observation unit care usage, hospital admission, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 1051 enrolled patients, 596 (56.7%) were admitted as inpatients, and 72 (6.9%) were placed in an observation unit. For patients admitted as inpatients, 23.7% had a length of stay ≤2 days. The conversion rate from observation to inpatient was 17.1% (95% CI 14.6-19.4) among those receiving care in an observation unit. The average observation unit length of stay was 14.7 h. Patient factors associated ED disposition to observation unit care were female gender and low Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, the discrepancy between observation unit care use and short inpatient hospitalization may represent underutilization of this resource and a target for process change.

Cancer pain management in the emergency department: a multicenter prospective observational trial of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN).

PURPOSE: Many patients with cancer seek care for pain in the emergency department (ED). Prospective research on cancer pain in this setting has historically been insufficient. We conducted this study to describe the reported pain among cancer patients presenting to the ED, how pain is managed, and how pain may be associated with clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study on adult patients with active cancer presenting to 18 EDs in the USA. We reported pain scores, response to medication, and analgesic utilization. We estimated the associations between pain severity, medication utilization, and the following outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, and ED disposition. RESULTS: The study population included 1075 participants. Those who received an opioid in the ED were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.88) and OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.17, 2.07)), respectively. Severe pain at ED presentation was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.05, 5.02), though this risk was attenuated when adjusting for clinical factors (most notably functional status). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe pain had a higher risk of mortality, which was attenuated when correcting for clinical characteristics. Those patients who required opioid analgesics in the ED were more likely to require admission and were more at risk of 30-day hospital readmission. Future efforts should focus on these at-risk groups, who may benefit from additional services including palliative care, hospice, or home-health services.

Assessing geriatric patients with head injury in the emergency department using the novel level III trauma protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Intracranial injury in elderly patients presenting with minor head trauma is often overlooked in the emergency department (ED). Our suburban community-based level II trauma hospital developed and implemented the level III trauma protocol (L3TP) in January 2016 to better evaluate and diagnose intracranial injury in elderly patients presenting with minor head trauma after a fall. The L3TP requires that the ED physician immediately assess all patients meeting the following criteria 1) Age ≥ 65 years old. 2) Currently taking any anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents. 3) Presenting in the ED with a potential head injury after a fall. The ED physician determines if these high-risk patients require emergent imaging, obviating the need for trauma team activation unless an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is found. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the novel L3TP on resource utilization and patient outcome. METHODS: Our retrospective cohort study included patients who met the L3TP inclusion criteria and had an ICH diagnosed by non-contrast computed tomography (CT). We compared patients triaged by the L3TP (January to December 2017) to patients triaged before the L3TP was implemented (January to August 2015) in order to assess the impact of the L3TP on resource utilization and patient outcome. The data was analyzed using two independent samples t-tests and Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Patients triaged by the L3TP had a significantly shorter average length of time from arrival in the ED to CT (level III trauma 0.64 h vs control 2.37 h, (d = 1.73; 95% CI = 1.42, 2.04), p ≤ 0.0001) and ED length of stay (level III trauma 2.55 h vs control 4.72 h, (d = 2.17; 95% CI = 1.21, 3.13), p ≤ 0.0001). There was insufficient evidence to conclude that there was any difference in health outcomes between the control and level III trauma groups. CONCLUSION: The L3TP is an effective and resource efficient protocol that quickly identifies ICH in elderly patients without activating the trauma team for every elderly patient presenting to the ED with a potential head injury after a fall.

The Accuracy of Interqual Criteria in Determining the Observation versus Inpatient Status in Older Adults with Syncope.

BACKGROUND: McKesson's InterQual criteria are widely used in hospitals to determine if patients should be classified as observation or inpatient status, but the accuracy of the criteria is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether InterQual criteria accurately predicted length of stay (LOS) in older patients with syncope. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a cohort study of adults ≥60 years of age who had syncope. We calculated InterQual criteria and classified the patient as observation or inpatient status. Outcomes were whether LOS were less than or greater than 2 midnights. RESULTS: We analyzed 2361 patients; 1227 (52.0%) patients were male and 1945 (82.8%) were white, with a mean age of 73.2 ± 9.0 years. The median LOS was 32.6 h (interquartile range 24.2-71.8). The sensitivity of InterQual criteria for LOS was 60.8% (95% confidence interval 57.9-63.6%) and the specificity was 47.8% (95% confidence interval 45.0-50.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with syncope, those who met InterQual criteria for inpatient status had longer LOS compared with those who did not; however, the accuracy of the criteria to predict length of stay over 2 days is poor, with a sensitivity of 60% and a specificity of 48%. Future research should identify criteria to improve LOS prediction.

Risk Stratification of Older Adults Who Present to the Emergency Department With Syncope: The FAINT Score.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Older adults with syncope are commonly treated in the emergency department (ED). We seek to derive a novel risk-stratification tool to predict 30-day serious cardiac outcomes. METHODS: We performed a prospective, observational study of older adults (≥60 years) with unexplained syncope or near syncope who presented to 11 EDs in the United States. Patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED were excluded. We collected clinical and laboratory data on all patients. Our primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality or serious cardiac outcome. RESULTS: We enrolled 3,177 older adults with unexplained syncope or near syncope between April 2013 and September 2016. Mean age was 73 years (SD 9.0 years). The incidence of the primary outcome was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9% to 6.5%). Using Bayesian logistic regression, we derived the FAINT score: history of heart failure, history of cardiac arrhythmia, initial abnormal ECG result, elevated pro B-type natriuretic peptide, and elevated high-sensitivity troponin T. A FAINT score of 0 versus greater than or equal to 1 had sensitivity of 96.7% (95% CI 92.9% to 98.8%) and specificity 22.2% (95% CI 20.7% to 23.8%), respectively. The FAINT score tended to be more accurate than unstructured physician judgment: area under the curve 0.704 (95% CI 0.669 to 0.739) versus 0.630 (95% CI 0.589 to 0.670). CONCLUSION: Among older adults with syncope or near syncope of potential cardiac cause, a FAINT score of zero had a reasonably high sensitivity for excluding death and serious cardiac outcomes at 30 days. If externally validated, this tool could improve resource use for this common condition.

Validation of the Emergency Severity Index (Version 4) for the Triage of Adult Emergency Department Patients With Active Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with active cancer account for a growing percentage of all emergency department (ED) visits and have a unique set of risks related to their disease and its treatments. Effective triage for this population is fundamental to facilitating their emergency care. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the validity of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI; version 4) triage tool to predict ED-relevant outcomes among adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified analysis of the observational cohort established by the National Cancer Institute-supported Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network's multicenter (18 sites) study of ED visits by patients with active cancer (N = 1075). We used a series of χ2 tests for independence to relate ESI scores with 1) disposition, 2) ED resource use, 3) hospital length of stay, and 4) 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1008 subjects included in this analysis, the ESI distribution skewed heavily toward high acuity (>95% of subjects had an ESI level of 1, 2, or 3). ESI was significantly associated with patient disposition and ED resource use (p values < 0.05). No significant associations were observed between ESI and the non-ED based outcomes of hospital length of stay or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: ESI scores among ED patients with active cancer indicate higher acuity than the general ED population and are predictive of disposition and ED resource use. These findings show that the ESI is a valid triage tool for use in this population for outcomes directly relevant to ED care.

Clinical Benefit of Hospitalization for Older Adults With Unexplained Syncope: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Many adults with syncope are hospitalized solely for observation and testing. We seek to determine whether hospitalization versus outpatient management for older adults with unexplained syncope is associated with a reduction in postdisposition serious adverse events at 30 days. METHODS: We performed a propensity score analysis using data from a prospective, observational study of older adults with unexplained syncope or near syncope who presented to 11 emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. We enrolled adults (≥60 years) who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED. Clinical and laboratory data were collected on all patients. The primary outcome was rate of post-ED serious adverse events at 30 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 2,492 older adults with syncope and no serious ED diagnosis from April 2013 to September 2016. Mean age was 73 years (SD 8.9 years), and 51% were women. The incidence of serious adverse events within 30 days after the index visit was 7.4% for hospitalized patients and 3.19% for discharged patients, representing an unadjusted difference of 4.2% (95% confidence interval 2.38% to 6.02%). After propensity score matching on risk of hospitalization, there was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events at 30 days between the hospitalized group (4.89%) and the discharged group (2.82%) (risk difference 2.07%; 95% confidence interval -0.24% to 4.38%). CONCLUSION: In our propensity-matched sample of older adults with unexplained syncope, for those with clinical characteristics similar to that of the discharged cohort, hospitalization was not associated with improvement in 30-day serious adverse event rates.

End tidal CO2 and cerebral oximetry for the prediction of return of spontaneous circulation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: End Tidal CO2 (ETCO2) is a reasonable predictor of Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC) in cardiac arrest (CA), though with many limitations. Cerebral Oximetry (CerOx) non-invasively measures brain O2 saturation and correlates with flow. OBJECTIVES: This study compares ETCO2 and CerOx for ROSC prediction during both out of hospital (OHCA) and emergency department cardiac arrests (EDCA). METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on CA patients resuscitated in the ED. ETCO2 and CerOx simultaneously measured during ED CPR. Data was analyzed with logistic regression modeling and area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: 176 patients were analyzed, 66.7% were witnessed, 52.8% had bystander CPR. EMS alert to ED arrival was 27.0 ± 10.6 min. Initial rhythm was 31.8% asystole, 27.8% PEA, 25.6% VF/VT with 26.1% achieving ROSC. AUC predictors of ROSC were: last 5 min trend [CerOx = 0.82 ; ETCO2 = 0.74], delta first to last [CerOx = 0.86 ; ETCO2 = 0.73], the penultimate minute [CerOx = 0.81 ; ETCO2 = 0.76], and final minute [CerOx = 0.89 ; ETCO2 = 0.77]. AUC comparison of simultaneous measurements (n = 125) revealed: last 5 min trend [CerOx = 0.80 ; ETCO2 = 0.79], delta first to last [CerOx = 0.83 ; ETCO2 = 0.75], penultimate minute [CerOx = 0.83 ETCO2 = 0.74], and final minute [CerOx = 0.89 ; ETCO2 = 0.75]. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows, both ETCO2 and rSO2 are good predictors of ROSC. We found CerOx superior to ETCO2 in predicting ROSC.

Orthostatic vital signs do not predict 30 day serious outcomes in older emergency department patients with syncope: A multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: Syncope is a common chief complaint among older adults in the Emergency Department (ED), and orthostatic vital signs are often a part of their evaluation. We assessed whether abnormal orthostatic vital signs in the ED are associated with composite 30-day serious outcomes in older adults presenting with syncope. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a prospective, observational study at 11 EDs in adults ≥ 60 years who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients lost to follow up. We used the standard definition of abnormal orthostatic vital signs or subjective symptoms of lightheadedness upon standing to define orthostasis. We determined the rate of composite 30-day serious outcomes, including those during the index ED visit, such as cardiac arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, cardiac intervention, new diagnosis of structural heart disease, stroke, pulmonary embolism, aortic dissection, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, hemorrhage/anemia requiring transfusion, with major traumatic injury from fall, recurrent syncope, and death) between the groups with normal and abnormal orthostatic vital signs. RESULTS: The study cohort included 1974 patients, of whom 51.2% were male and 725 patients (37.7%) had abnormal orthostatic vital signs. Comparing those with abnormal to those with normal orthostatic vital signs, we did not find a difference in composite 30-serious outcomes (111/725 (15.3%) vs 184/1249 (14.7%); unadjusted odds ratio, 1.05 [95%CI, 0.81-1.35], p = 0.73). After adjustment for gender, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), history of arrhythmia, dyspnea, hypotension, any abnormal ECG, physician risk assessment, medication classes and disposition, there was no association with composite 30-serious outcomes (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95%CI, 0.62-1.09], p = 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of older adult patients presenting with syncope who were able to have orthostatic vital signs evaluated, abnormal orthostatic vital signs did not independently predict composite 30-day serious outcomes.

Analysis of Diagnoses, Symptoms, Medications, and Admissions Among Patients With Cancer Presenting to Emergency Departments.

Importance: Better understanding of the emergency care needs of patients with cancer will inform outpatient and emergency department (ED) management. Objective: To provide a benchmark description of patients who present to the ED with active cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 18 EDs affiliated with the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN). Of 1564 eligible patients, 1075 adults with active cancer were included from February 1, 2016, through January 30, 2017. Data were analyzed from February 1 through August 1, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients reporting symptoms (eg, pain, nausea) before and during the ED visit, ED and outpatient medications, most common diagnoses, and suspected infection as indicated by ED antibiotic administration. The proportions observed, admitted, and with a hospital length of stay (LOS) of no more than 2 days were identified. Results: Of 1075 participants, mean (SD) age was 62 (14) years, and 51.8% were female. Seven hundred ninety-four participants (73.9%; 95% CI, 71.1%-76.5%) had undergone cancer treatment in the preceding 30 days; 674 (62.7%; 95% CI, 59.7%-65.6%) had advanced or metastatic cancer; and 505 (47.0%; 95% CI, 43.9%-50.0%) were 65 years or older. The 5 most common ED diagnoses were symptom related. Of all participants, 82 (7.6%; 95% CI, 6.1%-9.4%) were placed in observation and 615 (57.2%; 95% CI, 54.2%-60.2%) were admitted; 154 of 615 admissions (25.0%; 95% CI, 21.7%-28.7%) had an LOS of 2 days or less (median, 3 days; interquartile range, 2-6 days). Pain during the ED visit was present in 668 patients (62.1%; 95% CI, 59.2%-65.0%; mean [SD] pain score, 6.4 [2.6] of 10.0) and in 776 (72.2%) during the prior week. Opioids were administered in the ED to 228 of 386 patients (59.1%; 95% CI, 18.8%-23.8%) with moderate to severe ED pain. Outpatient opioids were prescribed to 368 patients (47.4%; 95% CI, 3.14%-37.2%) of those with pre-ED pain, including 244 of 428 (57.0%; 95% CI, 52.2%-61.8%) who reported quite a bit or very much pain. Nausea in the ED was present in 336 (31.3%; 95% CI, 28.5%-34.1%); of these, 160 (47.6%; 95% CI, 12.8%-17.1%) received antiemetics in the ED. Antibiotics were administered in the ED to 285 patients (26.5%; 95% CI, 23.9%-29.2%). Of these, 209 patients (73.3%; 95% CI, 17.1%-21.9%) were admitted compared with 427 of 790 (54.1%; 95% CI, 50.5%-57.6%) not receiving antibiotics. Conclusions and Relevance: This initial prospective, multicenter study profiling patients with cancer who were treated in the ED identifies common characteristics in this patient population and suggests opportunities to optimize care before, during, and after the ED visit. Improvement requires collaboration between specialists and emergency physicians optimizing ED use, improving symptom control, avoiding unnecessary hospitalizations, and appropriately stratifying risk to ensure safe ED treatment and disposition of patients with cancer.

Do High-sensitivity Troponin and Natriuretic Peptide Predict Death or Serious Cardiac Outcomes After Syncope?

OBJECTIVES: An estimated 1.2 million annual emergency department (ED) visits for syncope/near syncope occur in the United States. Cardiac biomarkers are frequently obtained during the ED evaluation, but the prognostic value of index high-sensitivity troponin (hscTnT) and natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are unclear. The objective of this study was to determine if hscTnT and NT-proBNP drawn in the ED are independently associated with 30-day death/serious cardiac outcomes in adult patients presenting with syncope. METHODS: A prespecified secondary analysis of a prospective, observational trial enrolling participants ≥ age 60 presenting with syncope, at 11 United States hospitals, was conducted between April 2013 and September 2016. Exclusions included seizure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, trauma, intoxication, hypoglycemia, persistent confusion, mechanical/electrical invention, prior enrollment, or predicted poor follow-up. Within 3 hours of consent, hscTnT and NT-proBNP were collected and later analyzed centrally using Roche Elecsys Gen 5 STAT and 2010 Cobas, respectively. Primary outcome was combined 30-day all-cause mortality and serious cardiac events. Adjusting for illness severity, using multivariate logistic regression analysis, variations between primary outcome and biomarkers were estimated, adjusting absolute risk associated with ranges of biomarkers using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. RESULTS: The cohort included 3,392 patients; 367 (10.8%) experienced the primary outcome. Adjusted absolute risk for the primary outcome increased with hscTnT and NT-proBNP levels. HscTnT levels ≤ 5 ng/L were associated with a 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3%-5%) outcome risk, and hscTnT > 50 ng/L, a 29% (95% CI = 26%-33%) risk. NT-proBNP levels ≤ 125 ng/L were associated with a 4% (95% CI = 4%-5%) risk, and NT-proBNP > 2,000 ng/L a 29% (95% CI = 25%-32%) risk. Likelihood ratios and predictive values demonstrated similar results. Sensitivity analyses excluding ED index serious outcomes demonstrated similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: hscTnT and NT-proBNP are independent predictors of 30-day death and serious outcomes in older ED patients presenting with syncope.

QTc prolongation as a marker of 30-day serious outcomes in older patients with syncope presenting to the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Syncope is a common chief complaint in the ED, and the electrocardiogram (ECG) is a routine diagnostic tool in the evaluation of syncope. We assessed whether increasingly prolonged QTc intervals are associated with composite 30-day serious outcomes in older adults presenting to the ED with syncope. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective, observational study at 11 EDs in adults 60 years or older who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients presenting without an ECG, measurement of QTc, non-sinus rhythm, bundle branch block or those without 30-day follow-up. We categorized QTc cutoffs into values of <451; 451-470; 471-500, and >500 ms. We determined the rate of composite 30-day serious outcomes including ED serious outcomes and 30-day arrhythmias not identified in ED. RESULTS: The study cohort included 2609 patients. There were 1678 patients (64.3%) that had QTc intervals <451 ms; 544 (20.8%) were 451-470 ms; 302 (11.6%) were 471-500 ms, and 85 (3.3%) had intervals >500 ms. Composite 30-day serious outcomes was associated with increasingly prolonged QTc intervals (13.0%, 15.3%, 18.2%, 22.4%, p = 0.01), but this association did not persist in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of older patients presenting with syncope, increased QTc interval was a marker of but was not independently predictive of composite 30-day serious outcomes.

Recurrent syncope is not an independent risk predictor for future syncopal events or adverse outcomes.

Almost 20% of patients with syncope will experience another event. It is unknown whether recurrent syncope is a marker for a higher or lower risk etiology of syncope. The goal of this study is to determine whether older adults with recurrent syncope have a higher likelihood of 30-day serious clinical events than patients experiencing their first episode. METHODS: This study is a pre-specified secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective, observational study conducted at 11 emergency departments in the US. Adults 60 years or older who presented with syncope or near syncope were enrolled. The primary outcome was occurrence of 30-day serious outcome. The secondary outcome was 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmia. In multivariate analysis, we assessed whether prior syncope was an independent predictor of 30-day serious events. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3580 patients: 1281 (35.8%) had prior syncope and 2299 (64.2%) were presenting with first episode of syncope. 498 (13.9%) patients had 1 prior episode while 771 (21.5%) had >1 prior episode. Those with recurrent syncope were more likely to have congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, previous diagnosis of arrhythmia, and an abnormal ECG. Overall, 657 (18.4%) of the cohort had a serious outcome by 30 days after index ED visit. In multivariate analysis, we found no significant difference in risk of events (adjusted odds ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval 0.90-1.31; p = 0.387). CONCLUSION: In older adults with syncope, a prior history of syncope within the year does not increase the risk for serious 30-day events.