Prediction of admission to a low-resource sub-Saharan hospital by mental status, mobility and oxygen saturation recorded on arrival: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The decision to admit patients to hospital in low-resource settings have been poorly investigated. AIM: We aimed to determine the association of a disposition score determined on arrival with the decision subsequently made to admit or discharge the patient. The score awarded one point for altered mental status, one point for impaired mobility and one point for low oxygen saturation. METHODS: The mental status, mobility and oxygen saturation on arrival of 5,334 consecutive patients attending a combined emergency and outpatient department in a low-resource Ugandan hospital were recorded. Admission decisions were subsequently made independently by clinicians unaware to the score. RESULTS: Most patients (n=3,876; 73%) had a disposition score of zero and only 25 of these patients (0.6%) were subsequently admitted. A total of 646 (12.1%) patients were admitted. Only 301 (5.6%) patients had a score of 3 points and 263 (87.4%) of these were admitted. The C statistic for the discrimination of the score for admission was 0.953 (95% confidence interval 0.941-0.964). CONCLUSION: In a low-resource setting, a simple score based on mental status, mobility and oxygen saturation identified outpatient and emergency department patients most and least likely to be subsequently admitted to hospital with a high degree of discrimination.

Outcome of cancer patients considered for intensive care unit admission in two university hospitals in the Netherlands: the danger of delayed ICU admissions and off-hour triage decisions.

BACKGROUND: Very few studies assessed the association between Intensive Care Unit (ICU) triage decisions and mortality. The aim of this study was to assess whether an association could be found between 30-day mortality, and ICU admission consultation conditions and triage decisions. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in two large referral university hospitals in the Netherlands. We identified all adult cancer patients for whom ICU admission was requested from 2016 to 2019. Via a multivariable logistic regression analysis, we assessed the association between 30-day mortality, and ICU admission consultation conditions and triage decisions. RESULTS: Of the 780 cancer patients for whom ICU admission was requested, 332 patients (42.6%) were considered 'too well to benefit' from ICU admission, 382 (49%) patients were immediately admitted to the ICU and 66 patients (8.4%) were considered 'too sick to benefit' according to the consulting intensivist(s). The 30-day mortality in these subgroups was 30.1%, 36.9% and 81.8%, respectively. In the patient group considered 'too well to benefit', 258 patients were never admitted to the ICU and 74 patients (9.5% of the overall study population, 22.3% of the patients 'too well to benefit') were admitted to the ICU after a second ICU admission request (delayed ICU admission). Thirty-day mortality in these groups was 25.6% and 45.9%. After adjustment for confounders, ICU consultations during off-hours (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.09-2.38, p-value 0.02) and delayed ICU admission (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.00-3.33, p-value 0.048 compared to "ICU admission") were independently associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: The ICU denial rate in our study was high (51%). Sixty percent of the ICU triage decisions in cancer patients were made during off-hours, and 22.3% of the patients initially considered "too well to benefit" from ICU admission were subsequently admitted to the ICU. Both decisions during off-hours and a delayed ICU admission were associated with an increased risk of death at 30 days. Our study suggests that in cancer patients, ICU triage decisions should be discussed during on-hours, and ICU admission policy should be broadened, with a lower admission threshold for critically ill cancer patients.

Decision-making in the ICU: An analysis of the ICU admission decision-making process using a '20 Questions' approach.

Background: Deciding to admit a patient into the intensive care unit (ICU) is a high-stakes, high-stress, time-sensitive process. Elucidating the complexities of these decisions can contribute to a more efficient, effective process. Objectives: To explore physicians' strategic thought processes in ICU triage decisions and identify important factors. Methods: Practitioners (N=29) were asked to decide on ICU referrals of two hypothetic cases using a modified '20 Questions' approach. Demographic data, decisions when full information was available, feedback on questions, rating of factors previously identified as important and influence of faith and personality traits were explored. Results: Of the 735 questions asked, 95.92% were patient related. There were no significant differences in interview variables between the two cases or with regard to presentation order. The overall acceptance rate was 68.96%. Refusals were associated with longer interview times (p=0.014), as were lower ICU bed capacity (p=0.036), advancing age of the practitioner (p=0.040) and a higher faith score (p=0.004). Faith score correlated positively with the number of questions asked (p=0.028). There were no significant correlations with personality trait stanines. When full information was available, acceptances for Case A decreased (p=0.003) but increased for Case B (p=0.026). The net reclassification improvement index was -0.138 (p=0.248). Non-subspecialists were more likely to change their decisions (p=0.036). Conclusion: Limiting information to what is considered vital by using a '20 Questions' approach and allowing the receiving practitioner to create the decision frame may assist with ICU admission decisions. Practitioners should consider the metacognitive elements of their decision-making. Contributions of the study: The study used a novel approach to explore physicians' decision-making process for admitting a patient to the intensive care unit (ICU). Understanding the main factors that influence the decision-making process will allow for streamlining the referral process, more effective selection of patients most likely to benefit from ICU treatment, and prevent inappropriate admissions into the ICU. The findings can also help to improve data capture tools and encourage practitioners to critically reflect on their decision-making processes.

ICU Interventions in Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated Using Liberalized IV-tPA Criteria.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Current standard practice guidelines recommend ICU admission for ischemic stroke patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA). More recently, the trend in stroke care is to broaden eligibility for IV thrombolysis. Two examples are a more liberal inclusion criteria known as SMART criteria (sIV-tPA), and the transfer of patients to comprehensive stroke centers (CSC). The present study characterizes ICU interventions in these patients. Understanding which stroke patients that require ICU-level care may allow for placement of patients in the appropriate level of care at hospital admission. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of consecutive transfer and nontransfer sIV-tPA-treated patients admitted to the ICU at a CSC. We evaluated the frequency, timing, and nature of ICU interventions. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty one patients were treated with sIV-tPA and 42% required ICU interventions during ICU admission. Of patients requiring ICU interventions, 98% had an ICU intervention performed in triage, prior to admission. National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score only had a moderate association to requirement of ICU interventions. Neither transferring patients to a CSC nor the number of standard IV-tPA contraindications increased ICU interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Liberalized IV-tPA administration did not increase ICU interventions. Nearly all patients that required ICU interventions declared this need in triage, prior to ICU admission. This timing of ICU intervention use during triage is highly sensitive for whether a patient will require ongoing ICU-level care during hospital admission. Identifying ICU intervention use in triage may allow for more effective placement of post-IV-tPA patients in the appropriate inpatient care setting, leading to better utilization of scarce ICU resources.

A latent variable approach to potential outcomes for emergency department admission decisions.

In emergency departments (EDs), care providers continuously weigh admissions against continued monitoring and treatment often without knowing their condition and health needs. To understand the decision process and its causal effect on outcomes, an observational study must contend with unobserved/missing information and a lack of exchangeability between admitted and discharged patients. Our goal was to provide a general framework to evaluate admission decisions from electronic healthcare records (EHRs). We describe admission decisions as a decision-making process in which the patient's health needs is a binary latent variable. We estimate latent health needs from EHR with only partial knowledge of the decision process (ie, initial evaluation, admission decision, length of stay). Estimated latent health needs are then used to understand the admission decision and the decision's causal impact on outcomes. For the latter, we assume potential outcomes are stochastically independent from the admission decision conditional on latent health needs. As a case study, we apply our approach to over 150 000 patient encounters with the ED from the University of Michigan Health System collected from August 2012 through July 2015. We estimate that while admitting a patient with higher latent needs reduces the 30-day risk of revisiting the ED or later being admitted through the ED by over 79%, admitting a patient with lower latent needs actually increases these 30-day risks by 3.0% and 7.6%, respectively.

Decision-making in ICU - A systematic review of factors considered important by ICU clinician decision makers with regard to ICU triage decisions.

BACKGROUND: The ICU is a scarce resource within a high-stress, high-stakes, time-sensitive environment where critically ill patients with life-threatening conditions receive expensive life-sustaining care under the guidance of expert qualified personnel. The implications of decisions such as suitability for admission into ICU are potentially dire and difficult. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of clinicians' subjective perceptions of factors that influence the decision to accept or refuse patients referred to ICU. RESULTS: Twenty studies yielded 56 different factors classified into patient, physician and environmental. Common, important factors were: acute illness severity and reversibility; presence and severity of comorbidities; patient age, functional status, state-of-mind and wishes; physician level of experience and perception of patient QOL; and bed availability. Within-group variability among physicians and thought-deed discordance were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: The complex and dynamic ICU triage decision is affected by numerous interacting factors. The literature provides some indication of these factors, but fail to show complexities and interactions between them. A decision tree is proposed. Further research should include a reflection on how decisions for admission to ICU are made, such that a better understanding of these processes can be achieved allowing for improved individual and group consistency.