A Decision-Making Algorithm for Initiation and Discontinuation of RRT in Severe AKI.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: AKI is an increasingly common and devastating complication in hospitalized patients. Severe AKI requiring RRT is associated with in-hospital mortality rates exceeding 40%. Clinical decision making related to RRT initiation for patients with AKI in the medical intensive care unit is not standardized. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted a 13-month (November of 2013 to December of 2014) prospective cohort study in an academic medical intensive care unit involving the implementation of an AKI Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan, a decision-making algorithm to assist front-line clinicians caring for patients with AKI. The Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan algorithms provided recommendations about optimal indications for initiating and discontinuing RRT on the basis of various clinical parameters; 176 patients managed by nine nephrologists were included in the study. We captured reasons for deviation from the recommended algorithm as well as mortality data. RESULTS: Patients whose clinicians adhered to the Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan recommendation to start RRT had lower in-hospital mortality (42% versus 63%; P<0.01) and 60-day mortality (46% and 68%; P<0.01), findings that were confirmed after multivariable adjustment for age, albumin, and disease severity. There was a differential effect of Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan adherence in low (<50% mortality risk) versus high (≥50% mortality risk) disease severity on in-hospital mortality (interaction term P=0.02). In patients with low disease severity, Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan adherence was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.08 to 0.54; P=0.001), but no significant association was evident in patients with high disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: Physician adherence to an algorithm providing recommendations on RRT initiation was associated with lower in-hospital mortality.

Implementation of a Risk Stratification and Management Pathway for Acute Chest Pain in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Chest pain is a common complaint in the emergency department, and a small but important minority represents an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Variation in diagnostic workup, risk stratification, and management may result in underuse, misuse, and/or overuse of resources. METHODS: From July to October 2014, we conducted a prospective cohort study in an academic medical center by implementing a Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan (SCAMP) for chest pain based on the HEART score. In addition to capturing adherence to the SCAMP algorithm and reasons for any deviations, we measured troponin sample timing; rates of stress test utilization; length of stay (LOS); and 30-day rates of revascularization, ACS, and death. RESULTS: We identified 239 patients during the enrollment period who were eligible to enter the SCAMP, of whom 97 patients were entered into the pathway. Patients were risk stratified into one of 3 risk tiers: high (n = 3), intermediate (n = 40), and low (n = 54). Among low-risk patients, recommendations for troponin testing were not followed in 56%, and 11% received stress tests contrary to the SCAMP recommendation. None of the low-risk patients had elevated troponin measurements, and none had an abnormal stress test. Mean LOS in low-risk patients managed with discordant plans was 22:26 h/min, compared with 9:13 h/min in concordant patients (P < 0.001). Mean LOS in intermediate-risk patients with stress testing was 25:53 h/min, compared with 7:55 h/min for those without (P < 0.001). At 30 days, 10% of intermediate-risk patients and 0% of low-risk patients experienced an ACS event (risk difference 10% [0.7%-19%]); none experienced revascularization or death. The most frequently cited reason for deviation from the SCAMP was lack of confidence in the tool. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with SCAMP recommendations for low- and intermediate-risk patients was poor, largely due to lack of confidence in the tool. However, in our study population, outcomes suggest that deviation from the SCAMP yielded no additional clinical benefit while significantly prolonging emergency department LOS.