Low admission blood pressure as a marker of poor 1-year survival in patients with revascularized critical limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: To contrast the association between blood pressure (BP) level and antihypertensive medications at hospital admission with 1-year mortality in patients undergoing revascularization for critical limb ischemia (CLI). METHODS: From November 2013 to May 2019, 315 consecutive patients were retrospectively included. A median of seven (IQR 3-13) separate readings were recorded for each patient before revascularization procedure and the average represented patient's mean BP. BP-lowering medications, clinical and biological parameters were recorded at baseline. The main outcome was total 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The cohort included 172 men (55%) and 143 women (45%), with a mean age of 77.9 ±â€Š11.9 years. Treated hypertension was present in 245 (78%) patients; 288 (91%) patients had BP-lowering drug prescriptions (2.1 ±â€Š1.3 medications at baseline). Mean SBP, DBP, mean BP (MBP) and pulse pressure (PP) were 132 ±â€Š18, 70 ±â€Š8, 90 ±â€Š10 and 62 ±â€Š16mmHg. During 1-year follow-up, 80 (25.4%) patients died. In single-pressure multivariate analysis, SBP (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.96-0.99; P = 0.005), MBP (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.92-0.99; P = 0.01), PP (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.99; P = 0.009), but not DBP, were inversely correlated with 1-year mortality, independently of age, coronary heart disease, left ventricular ejection fraction, brain natriuretic peptide, serum albumin, institutionalized status and antihypertensive drugs. Association between SBP, MBP and PP with 1-year mortality had a quite linear reverse pattern. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing revascularization for CLI, there is an inverse correlation between admission SBP, MBP and PP with 1-year mortality. BP may represent a modifiable therapeutic target to prevent poor outcome in CLI patients.

A machine learning-based clinical decision support system to identify prescriptions with a high risk of medication error.

OBJECTIVE: To improve patient safety and clinical outcomes by reducing the risk of prescribing errors, we tested the accuracy of a hybrid clinical decision support system in prioritizing prescription checks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from electronic health records were collated over a period of 18 months. Inferred scores at a patient level (probability of a patient's set of active orders to require a pharmacist review) were calculated using a hybrid approach (machine learning and a rule-based expert system). A clinical pharmacist analyzed randomly selected prescription orders over a 2-week period to corroborate our findings. Predicted scores were compared with the pharmacist's review using the area under the receiving-operating characteristic curve and area under the precision-recall curve. These metrics were compared with existing tools: computerized alerts generated by a clinical decision support (CDS) system and a literature-based multicriteria query prioritization technique. Data from 10 716 individual patients (133 179 prescription orders) were used to train the algorithm on the basis of 25 features in a development dataset. RESULTS: While the pharmacist analyzed 412 individual patients (3364 prescription orders) in an independent validation dataset, the areas under the receiving-operating characteristic and precision-recall curves of our digital system were 0.81 and 0.75, respectively, thus demonstrating greater accuracy than the CDS system (0.65 and 0.56, respectively) and multicriteria query techniques (0.68 and 0.56, respectively). DISCUSSION: Our innovative digital tool was notably more accurate than existing techniques (CDS system and multicriteria query) at intercepting potential prescription errors. CONCLUSIONS: By primarily targeting high-risk patients, this novel hybrid decision support system improved the accuracy and reliability of prescription checks in a hospital setting.

Predictive value of admission blood pressure for 3-month mortality in patients undergoing revascularization for critical limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), blood pressure (BP) impact on mortality is unknown. We analyzed the predictive value of SBP, DBP and pulse pressure (PP) at hospital admission on 3-month mortality in patients with CLI undergoing revascularization procedure. METHODS: From November 2013 to December 2018, 297 consecutive patients were retrospectively included. Admission BP was recorded using automated brachial sphygmomanometer, before revascularization procedure. A median of seven (IQR3-13) separate readings were recorded for each patient and the average represented patient's mean BP (mBP). Clinical and biological parameters were recorded at baseline. RESULTS: The cohort included 163 men (55%) and 134 women (45%) with a mean age of 77.7 ±â€Š11.9 years. Treated hypertension and diabetes were present in, respectively, 62 and 48% of patients. Mean SBP, DBP and PP were 132 ±â€Š18, 70 ±â€Š8 and 62 ±â€Š16 mmHg. Thirty-four patients (11.4%) died during 3-month follow-up, mostly from cardiovascular causes. In univariate analysis, age, female sex, brain natriuretic peptide and C-reactive protein were positively correlated with mortality. BMI, mSBP, mDBP, mPP, hemoglobin, serum albumin and statin treatment were negatively correlated with mortality. In single-pressure multivariate analyses, mSBP (P = 0.024) and mPP (P = 0.030) were negatively correlated with mortality. Association between mSBP and mortality had an asymptotic curve pattern and SBP level 135 mmHg or less was significantly correlated with mortality. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing revascularization for CLI, admission SBP is an independent predictor for short-term mortality with a negative relationship. SBP level 135 mmHg or less represents a warning sign to explore and correct associated comorbidities.

Highly sensitive and efficient computer-assisted system for routine surveillance for surgical site infection.

OBJECTIVES: Surveillance of surgical site infections (SSIs) is effective in reducing the rates of these complications, but it is extremely time-consuming and, consequently, underused. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of a computer-assisted surveillance system, compared with a conventional method involving review of medical records, and the time saved with the computer-assisted system. METHOD: A prospective study was conducted from January 1 to December 31, 2001. With the computer-assisted method, screening for SSIs relied on identification in the laboratory database of positive results of microbiological tests of surgical-site specimens; confirmation was obtained via computer-generated questionnaires completed by the surgeon in charge of the patient. In the conventional method, SSIs were identified by exhaustive chart review. The time spent on surveillance was recorded for both methods. SETTING: A 25-bed gastrointestinal surgery unit in a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 766 consecutive patients who underwent gastrointestinal surgery. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the computer-assisted method was 84.3% (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.94); the specificity was 99.9%. For the 807 surgical procedures in the study, 197 had an SSI identified by culture of a surgical-site specimen. After elimination of 63 duplicate cultures with positive results, 134 questionnaires were sent to the surgeons, who confirmed 27 SSIs. The conventional method identified 32 SSIs. The computer-assisted method required 60% less time than the conventional method (90 hours vs 223 hours). CONCLUSION: Surveillance for SSIs using computer-assisted, laboratory-based screening and case confirmation by surgeons is as efficient as and far less time-consuming than the conventional method of chart review. This method permits routine surveillance for SSIs with reliable accuracy.