Impact of a geriatric intervention based on the Comprehensive Geriatrics Assessment on avoidable admissions in older patients at risk evaluated in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: To know the impact of a geriatric intervention based on the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) on avoidable admissions in older patients at risk evaluated in the Emergency Department. METHOD: Prospective observational unicenter study. We included patients, from October 1, 2018 to January 31, 2020, over 75 years who were attended at the Emergency Department with a Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) score≥2. All patients were evaluated by a geriatrician through the CGA. The reasons for going to the Emergency room were collected and also the main intervention carried out by Geriatrics, whether admission or discharge was indicated and whether the admission was avoidable. We did a cost analysis calculating this by (bed/day×average stay×number of admissions avoided). RESULTS: We included 260 patients, 66% were women and the mean age was 86 years. 73.5% patients had polypharmacy, the mean Charlson index was 2.5 (5.6). 63.3% were independent for walking and 20.8% independent for basic activities of daily living. 59% had cognitive impairment. 91.5% lived at home. The most frequent reason for visiting the Emergency room was decline of general state in 22% and the most frequent intervention carried out by Geriatrics was assistance in the decision making process in 35.4% followed by referral to a preferential outpatient geriatric care circuit in 32.7%. Other interventions carried out by Geriatrics was assistance in clarifying diagnosis (4.2%), assistance in pharmacological adjustment (8.5%), referral to a standard geriatric care pathway (13.1%), telephone follow-up (4.2%) and/or coordination with Social Services for care planning (11.2%). Including all patients, 29.2% required hospital admission and 70.8% were discharged. 40% admissions were avoided, which meant more than 540 thousand euros saved. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized CGA coordinated by Geriatrics in older patients at risk of suffering adverse events in the Emergency room reduces admissions and costs, so it should therefore be established as a recommendation of good clinical practice.

Performance of 3 frailty scales for predicting adverse outcomes at 30 days in older patients discharged from emergency departments. / Rendimiento de tres escalas de fragilidad para predecir resultados adversos a 30 días en los pacientes mayores dados de alta en los servicios de urgencias.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the ability of 3 frailty scales (the Clinical Frailty Scale [CFS], the Functional Index - eMergency [FIM], and the Identification of Seniors at Risk [ISAR] scale) to predict adverse outcomes at 30 days in older patients discharged from hospital emergency departments (EDs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the FRAIL-Madrid registry of patients aged 75 years or older who were discharged from Madrid EDs over a period of 3 months in 2018 and 2019. Frailty was defined by a CFS score over 4, a FIM score over 2, or an ISAR score over 3. The outcome variables were revisits to an ED, hospitalization, functional decline, death, and a composite variable of finding any of the previously named variables within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: A total of 619 patients were studied. The mean (SD) age was 84 (7) years, and 59.1% were women. The CFS identified as frail a total of 339 patients (54.8%), the FIM 386 (62.4%), and the ISAR 301 (48.6%). An adverse outcome occurred within 30 days in 226 patients (36.5%): 21.5% revisited, 12.6% were hospitalized, 18.4% experienced functional decline, and 3.6% died. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were as follows: CFS, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.62-0.70; P = .022); FIM, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.71; P = .021), and ISAR, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60-0.69; P = .023). Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) showed that frailty was an independent risk factor for presenting any of the named adverse outcomes: aOR for CFS >4, 3.18 (95% CI, 2.02-5.01), P .001; aOR for FIM > 2, 3.49 (95% CI, 2.15-5.66), P .001; and aOR for ISAR >3, 2.46 (95% CI, 1.60-3.79), P .001. CONCLUSION: All 3 scales studied - the CFS, the FIM and the ISAR - are useful for identifying frail older patients at high risk of developing an adverse outcome (death, functional decline, hospitalization, or revisiting the ED) within 30 days after discharge.

OBJETIVO: Comparar la capacidad de tres escalas de fragilidad, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Functional Index ­ eMergency (FIM) e Identification Senior at Risk (ISAR), para predecir resultados adversos (RA) a 30 días en los pacientes mayores dados de alta desde el servicio de urgencias hospitalario (SUH). METODO: Análisis secundario del registro FRAIL-Madrid que incluyó pacientes 75 años dados de alta de 10 SUH de Madrid durante un periodo de 3 meses entre 2018 y 2019. Se definió fragilidad como CFS 4, FIM 2 e ISAR 3. Las variables de resultado fueron revisita en urgencias, hospitalización, deterioro funcional, muerte y la variable compuesta por algún RA de los anteriores en los 30 días posteriores al alta del SUH. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 619 pacientes, la edad media fue de 84 años (DE 7), 59,1% eran mujeres. Hubo 339 pacientes (54,8%) identificados como frágiles en el SUH según CFS 4, 386 (62,4%) según FIM 2 y 301 (48,6%) según ISAR 3. Hubo 226 pacientes (36,5%) que presentaron algún RA a los 30 días tras el alta (21,5% revisita, 12,6% hospitalización,18,4% deterioro funcional y 3,6% muerte). El área bajo la curva (ABC) de la escala CFS fue de 0,66 (0,62-0,70; p = 0,022), de FIM 0,67 (0,62-0,71; p = 0,021) y de ISAR 0,64 (0,60-0,69; p = 0,023). La presencia de fragilidad fue un factor independiente de presentar algún RA a los 30 días tras el alta (CFS 4 ORa 3,18 [IC 95% 2,02-5,01, p 0,001], FIM 2 ORa 3,49 [IC 95% 2,15-5,66, p 0,001] e ISAR 3 ORa 2,46 [IC 95% 1,60-3,79, p 0,001]). CONCLUSIONES: Las tres escalas estudiadas ­CFS, FIM, ISAR­ son útiles y tienen una capacidad similar para identificar al paciente mayor frágil dado de alta del SUH con alto riesgo de presentar RA (muerte, deterioro funcional, hospitalización o revisita al SUH) a los 30 días.

Effect of EARLY administration of DEXamethasone in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and risk of development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (EARLY-DEX COVID-19): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are one of the few drugs that have shown a reduction in mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the RECOVERY trial, the use of dexamethasone reduced 28-day mortality compared to standard care in hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen or invasive mechanical ventilation. Evidence has shown that 30% of COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms at presentation will progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), particularly patients in whom laboratory inflammatory biomarkers associated with COVID-19 disease progression are detected. We postulated that dexamethasone treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without additional oxygen requirements and at risk of progressing to severe disease might lead to a decrease in the development of ARDS and thereby reduce death. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, parallel, open-label trial testing dexamethasone in 252 adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who do not require supplementary oxygen on admission but are at risk factors for the development of ARDS. Risk for the development of ARDS is defined as levels of lactate dehydrogenase > 245 U/L, C-reactive protein > 100 mg/L, and lymphocyte count of < 0.80 × 109/L. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either dexamethasone or standard of care. Patients in the dexamethasone group will receive a dose of 6 mg once daily during 7 days. The primary outcome is a composite of the development of moderate or more severe ARDS and all-cause mortality during the 30-day period following enrolment. DISCUSSION: If our hypothesis is correct, the results of this study will provide additional insights into the management and progression of this specific subpopulation of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without additional oxygen requirements and at risk of progressing to severe disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04836780. Registered on 8 April 2021 as EARLY-DEX COVID-19.

Developing modular training components to support home hospital digital solutions: Results of a Delphi panel.

BACKGROUND: Home hospitalization (HH) has demonstrated to be a cost-effective alternative with respect ti traditional hospitalization. Digital technologies, such as remote monitoring, have the potential to contribute to its expansion. Tailored educational content is a need to ensure patient safety during the whole admission. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to systematically obtain consensus on patients with HH using training in the digital monitoring system. The goal of this work was to develop an adaptable modular and personalized training program for patients to support quality and safety care for HH. METHODS: The methodological approach for developing the proposed training content followed a modified Delphi technique with a multidisciplinary group of experts with significant knowledge of health informatics and HH protocols in Spain. The study comprised two rounds of training material description and gathering were completed. In Round 1, the experts received 58 predefined items obtained from the literature review and protocol selection. 20 items were rejected for different reasons and 25 new items were proposed. In Round 2, the experts selected the final items to build on the training content for every type of user and illness. RESULTS: A total of 21 experts completed rounds 1 and 2. The consensus was reached at the end of Round 2 with the inclusion of 53 items to build the training material. This included 17 treatment procedures, 4 diagnosis procedures, 22 additional support content, and 10 content features that describe how to build and deliver customized training content. CONCLUSIONS: Participants agreed on the type of content, its structure, and delivery methods to build modular training materials that support patients when they are hospitalized at home with the help of digital monitoring tools. This information can be used to create HH training programs that support new HH protocols and provide a standard for evaluating the quality of existing educational materials and programs.

[Physical structure, human resources, and health care quality indicators in public hospital emergency departments in the autonomous communities of Madrid and Catalonia: a comparative study]. / Estudio comparativo de la estructura física, recursos humanos e indicadores de actividad asistencial entre los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios públicos de las comunidades autónomas de Madrid y Cataluña.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the general, structural, and organizational characteristics of public hospital emergency departments in the Spanish autonomous communities of Madrid and Catalonia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Descriptive survey-based study covering 3 areas of inquiry: general hospital features (18 questions), structural features of the emergency department (14 questions), and organizational and work-related policies of the emergency department (30 questions). Hospitals were grouped according to complexity: local hospitals (level 1), high-technology or referral hospitals (levels 2-3). RESULTS: We studied 26 hospital departments in Madrid (21, levels 2-3; 5, level 1) and 55 in Catalonia (24, levels 2-3; 31, level 1). Hospitals in Madrid are in newer buildings (P=.002), have more beds on conventional wards and in critical care units (P<.001, both comparisons), are more often affiliated with a university (P<.001), and serve larger populations (P=.027). The emergency departments in Madrid have larger surface areas available for clinical care and more cubicles for preliminary evaluations and observation beds (P=.001, all comparisons). Hospitals in Madrid also attended a larger median number of emergencies (P<.001). More physicians were employed in Catalonia overall, but the numbers of physician- and nurse-hours per hospital were higher in Madrid, where it was more usual for physicians to work exclusively in the emergency department (92.5% in Madrid vs 56.8% in Catalonia, P<.001). However, fewer of the employed physicians had permanent contracts in Madrid (30.5% vs 75.1% in Catalonia, P<.001). The ratio of resident physicians to staff physicians differs between the 2 communities on afternoon/evening, night, and holiday shifts (3:1 in Madrid; 1:1 in Catalonia). CONCLUSION: The physical and functional structures of hospital emergency departments in the communities of Madrid and Catalonia differ significantly. The differences cannot be attributed exclusively to geographic location.

OBJETIVO: Comparar las características generales, estructurales y organizativas de los servicios de urgencias de hospitales públicos (SUHP) de la Comunidad de Madrid con los de Cataluña. METODO: Estudio descriptivo tipo encuesta estructurada con 3 apartados: aspectos generales del hospital (18 preguntas), aspectos generales y estructurales de urgencias (14 preguntas), y aspectos organizativos y laborales de urgencias (30 preguntas). Los centros se agruparon según complejidad: niveles I-hospital comarcal y niveles II y III-hospital de alta tecnología o de referencia. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron los 26 SUHP de la Comunidad de Madrid (21 nivel II-III y 5 nivel I), y 55 de Cataluña (24 nivel II- III y 31 nivel I). En Madrid, comparada con Cataluña: los hospitales son de construcción más reciente (p = 0,002); tienen mayor número de camas de hospitalización (p < 0,001) y de cuidados críticos (p < 0,001); están más frecuentemente vinculados a la universidad (p < 0,001) y cubren mayor población (p = 0,027). Los servicios de urgencias: tienen mayor superficie para la actividad clínica (p < 0,001) y la primera asistencia (p < 0,001); mayor número de puestos de primera asistencia (p < 0,001) y camas de observación (p = 0,001) y la mediana del número de atenciones urgentes es mayor (p < 0,001). De forma global, hay más facultativos contratados en Cataluña, pero el número de horas de médico y enfermera contratadas por centro es mayor en Madrid, donde los médicos suelen realizar su actividad exclusivamente en urgencias (92,5% frente a 56,8%; p < 0,001), muy pocos con contrato fijo indefinido (30,5% frente a 75,1%; p < 0,001) con relación médico residente/adjunto diferente en turnos de tarde, noche y días festivos en comparación con los SUHP catalanes (3:1 frente a 1:1). CONCLUSIONES: La estructura física y funcional de los SUHP madrileños y catalanes difiere de forma significativa sin que pueda explicarse, exclusivamente, por los aspectos geográficos.

Clinical features of patients inappropriately undiagnosed of pulmonary embolism.

PURPOSES: The objective of this study was to identify clinical factors associated with delayed diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) in the emergency department (ED). BASIC PROCEDURES: A retrospective observational study was performed at three University affiliated Hospitals; 436 consecutive patients who presented to the ED with an acute PE confirmed by chest computed tomography from 2008 to 2011 were included. Patients were divided into 3 groups: group 1, PE was diagnosed while the patient was still in the ED; group 2, PE was diagnosed during hospitalization; group 3, patients who were sent home with a wrong alternative diagnosis and returned to the ED and were diagnosed of PE. MAIN FINDINGS: One hundred forty-six patients (33.5%) had a delayed diagnosis of PE--21.5% belong to group 2 and 11.9% to Group 3. Chronic coexisting medical conditions like asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were independent predictors of a delayed diagnosis in patients who were admitted to hospital whereas non-specific and less severe symptoms like the presence of pleuro-mechanic thoracic pain, fever, hemoptysis, or the presence of a pulmonary infiltrate in chest x-ray were independent predictors of a delayed diagnosis in patients who were sent home. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Delay in diagnosis of acute PE is frequent despite current diagnostic strategies. Patients are sent home or admitted to hospital with a wrong diagnosis depending on clinical presentation or coexisting medical conditions.