Prognostic performance of clinical assessment tools following hip fracture in patients with chronic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: People living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at a higher risk of hip fracture with an associated increased mortality risk compared to individuals without CKD. Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical assessment tools that best predict mortality risk following hip fracture for patients with CKD. METHODS: Patients with CKD G3b-5D admitted to Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, U.K. between June 2013 and Dec 2019 were included. The association between CKD and post-fracture mortality risk was evaluated. All patients were assessed using tools that evaluated frailty status, co-morbidity, pre-operative risk, functional status and cardiopulmonary fitness. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to determine the prognostic accuracy of the assessment tools for 30 day and 1 year mortality following hip fracture in patients with CKD. RESULTS: 397 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria with a mean age of 83.5 ± 9.2 years. Older age, female sex, intracapsular fracture and more severe CKD, co-morbidity and frailty status were all associated with an increased mortality risk. Patients with dialysis-dependent CKD and severe/very severe frailty had a hazard ratio for mortality of 2.55 (95% Cl 2.11-2.98) and 3.11 (95% Cl 2.47-3.93), respectively. The Clinical Frailty Scale demonstrated the best prognostic accuracy for both 30 day [Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.91, 95% Cl 0.84-0.97] and 1 year mortality (AUC 0.93, 95% Cl 0.87-1.00). CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced CKD and severe frailty have a high mortality risk following hip fracture. The Clinical Frailty Scale is an excellent prognostic tool for mortality in this setting and could be easily incorporated into routine clinical practice.

Potential added value of the new emergency care dataset to ED-based public health surveillance in England: an initial concept analysis.

INTRODUCTION: For the London Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012, a sentinel ED syndromic surveillance system was established to enhance public health surveillance by obtaining data from a selected network of EDs, focusing on London. In 2017, a new national standard Emergency Care Dataset was introduced, which enabled Public Health England (PHE) to initiate the expansion of their sentinel system to national coverage. Prior to this initiative, we estimated the added value, and potential additional resource use, of an expansion of the sentinel surveillance system. METHODS: The detection capabilities of the sentinel and national systems were compared using the aberration detection methods currently used by PHE. Different scenarios were used to measure the impact on health at a local, subnational and national level, including improvements to sensitivity and timeliness, along with changes in specificity. RESULTS: The biggest added value was found to be for detecting local impacts, with an increase in sensitivity of over 80%. There were also improvements found at a national level with outbreaks being detected earlier and smaller impacts being detectable. However, the increased number of local sites will also increase the number of false alarms likely to be generated. CONCLUSION: We have quantified the added value of national ED syndromic surveillance systems, showing how they will enable detection of more localised events. Furthermore, national systems add value in enabling timelier public health interventions. Finally, we have highlighted areas where extra resource may be required to manage improvements in detection coverage.

The PAndemic INfluenza Triage in the Emergency Department (PAINTED) pilot cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Research needs to be undertaken rapidly in the event of an influenza pandemic to develop and evaluate triage methods for people presenting to the emergency department with suspected pandemic influenza. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to pilot a research study to be undertaken in a pandemic to identify the most accurate triage method for patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected pandemic influenza. The objectives of the pilot study were to develop a standardised clinical assessment form and secure online database; test both using data from patients with seasonal influenza; seek clinician views on the usability of the form; and obtain all regulatory approvals required for the main study. DESIGN: Study methods were piloted using an observational cohort study and clinician views were sought using qualitative, semistructured interviews. SETTING: Six acute hospital emergency departments. PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending the emergency department with suspected seasonal influenza during winter 2012-13 and clinicians working in the emergency departments. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse events up to 30 days were identified, but analysis of the pilot data was limited to descriptive reporting of patient flow, data completeness and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Some 165 patients were identified, of whom 10 withdrew their data, leaving 155 (94%) for analysis. Follow-up data were available for 129 of 155 (83%), with 50 of 129 (39%) being admitted to hospital. Three cases (2%) were recorded as having suffered an adverse outcome. There appeared to be variation between the hospitals, allowing for small numbers. Three of the hospitals identified 150 of 165 (91%) of the patients, and all 10 withdrawing patients were at the same hospital. The proportion with missing follow-up data varied from 8% to 31%, and the proportion admitted varied from 4% to 85% across the three hospitals with meaningful numbers of cases. All of the deaths were at one hospital. There was less variation between hospitals in rates of missing data, and for most key variables missing rates were between 5% and 30%. Higher missing rates were recorded for blood pressure (39%), inspired oxygen (43%), capillary refill (36%) and Glasgow Coma Scale score (43%). Chest radiography was performed in 51 of 118 cases, and electrocardiography in 40 of 111 cases with details recorded. Blood test results were available for 32 of 155 cases. The qualitative interviews revealed generally positive views towards the standardised assessment form. Concerns about lack of space for free text were raised but counterbalanced by appreciation that it fitted on to one A4 page. A number of amendments were suggested but only three of these were suggested by more than one participant, and no suggestions were made by more than two participants. CONCLUSIONS: A standardised assessment form is acceptable to clinicians and could be used to collect research data in an influenza pandemic, but analysis may be limited by missing data. FUTURE WORK: An observational cohort study to identify the most accurate triage method for predicting severe illness in emergency department attendees with suspected pandemic influenza is set up and ready to activate if, or when, a pandemic occurs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56149622. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Disaster management in low- and middle-income countries: scoping review of the evidence base.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, there has been an increase in the prevalence and scale of disasters with low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) tending to be more affected. Consequently, disaster risk reduction has been advocated as a global priority. However, the evidence base for disaster management in these settings is unclear. METHODS: This study is a scoping review of the evidence base for disaster management in LMIC. Potentially relevant articles between 1990 and 2011 were searched for, assessed for relevance and subsequently categorised using a thematic coding framework based on the US Integrated Emergency Management System model. RESULTS: Out of 1545 articles identified, only 178 were from LMIC settings. Most were of less robust design such as event reports and commentaries, and 66% pertained to natural disasters. There was a paucity of articles on disaster mitigation or recovery, and more were written on disaster response and preparedness issues. DISCUSSION: Considerably more articles were published from high-income country settings that may reflect a publication bias. Current grey literature on disaster management tends not to be peer reviewed, is not well organised and not easy to access. The paucity of peer-reviewed publications compromises evidence review initiatives that seek to provide an evidence-base for disaster management in LMIC. As such, there is an urgent need for greater research and publication of findings on disaster management issues from these settings.

Genetics in clinical practice: general practitioners' educational priorities in European countries.

PURPOSE: To assess how general practitioners (GPs) from European countries prioritized their genetic educational needs according to their geographic, sociodemographic, and educational characteristics. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey, random and total samples of GPs in five European countries (France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and United Kingdom), mailed questionnaires; OUTCOME: Genetic Educational Priority Scale (30 items; six subscores). RESULTS: A total 1168 GPs answered. Priorities differed (P < 0.001) but were consistently ranked across the countries. Previous education had a marginal effect on priorities. Women gave higher priorities than men to Genetics of Common Disorders (adjusted odds ratio [OR adj], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-3.8), Psychosocial and Counseling Issues (OR adj, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5), and Ethical, Legal, and Public Health Issues (OR adj, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8), but lower than men to Techniques and Innovation in Genetics (OR adj, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9). Older physicians gave higher priorities to Basic Genetics and Congenital Malformations (OR adj, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9), and to Techniques and Innovation in Genetics (OR adj: 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.7), compared with their younger colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Expressed genetic educational needs vary according to the countries and sociodemographics. In accordance, training could be more focused on genetics of common disorders and on how to approach genetic risk in clinical practice rather than on ethics, new technologies, or basic concepts.