Safer and more efficient vital signs monitoring protocols to identify the deteriorating patients in the general hospital ward: an observational study.

Background: The frequency at which patients should have their vital signs (e.g. blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturation) measured on hospital wards is currently unknown. Current National Health Service monitoring protocols are based on expert opinion but supported by little empirical evidence. The challenge is finding the balance between insufficient monitoring (risking missing early signs of deterioration and delays in treatment) and over-observation of stable patients (wasting resources needed in other aspects of care). Objective: Provide an evidence-based approach to creating monitoring protocols based on a patient's risk of deterioration and link these to nursing workload and economic impact. Design: Our study consisted of two parts: (1) an observational study of nursing staff to ascertain the time to perform vital sign observations; and (2) a retrospective study of historic data on patient admissions exploring the relationships between National Early Warning Score and risk of outcome over time. These were underpinned by opinions and experiences from stakeholders. Setting and participants: Observational study: observed nursing staff on 16 randomly selected adult general wards at four acute National Health Service hospitals. Retrospective study: extracted, linked and analysed routinely collected data from two large National Health Service acute trusts; data from over 400,000 patient admissions and 9,000,000 vital sign observations. Results: Observational study found a variety of practices, with two hospitals having registered nurses take the majority of vital sign observations and two favouring healthcare assistants or student nurses. However, whoever took the observations spent roughly the same length of time. The average was 5:01 minutes per observation over a 'round', including time to locate and prepare the equipment and travel to the patient area. Retrospective study created survival models predicting the risk of outcomes over time since the patient was last observed. For low-risk patients, there was little difference in risk between 4 hours and 24 hours post observation. Conclusions: We explored several different scenarios with our stakeholders (clinicians and patients), based on how 'risk' could be managed in different ways. Vital sign observations are often done more frequently than necessary from a bald assessment of the patient's risk, and we show that a maximum threshold of risk could theoretically be achieved with less resource. Existing resources could therefore be redeployed within a changed protocol to achieve better outcomes for some patients without compromising the safety of the rest. Our work supports the approach of the current monitoring protocol, whereby patients' National Early Warning Score 2 guides observation frequency. Existing practice is to observe higher-risk patients more frequently and our findings have shown that this is objectively justified. It is worth noting that important nurse-patient interactions take place during vital sign monitoring and should not be eliminated under new monitoring processes. Our study contributes to the existing evidence on how vital sign observations should be scheduled. However, ultimately, it is for the relevant professionals to decide how our work should be used. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN10863045. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/05/03) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Patient recovery in hospital is tracked by measuring heart rate, blood pressure and other 'vital signs' and converting them into a score. These are 'observed' regularly by nursing staff so that deterioration can be spotted early. However, taking observations can disturb patients, and taking them too often causes extra work for staff. More frequent monitoring is recommended for higher scores, but evidence is lacking. To work out how often patients should be monitored, we needed to know how likely it is for patients to become more unwell between observations. We analysed over 400,000 patient records from two hospitals to understand how scores change with time. We looked at three of the most serious risks for patients in hospital. These risks are dying, needing intensive care or having a cardiac arrest. We also looked at the risk that a patient's condition would deteriorate significantly before their measurements were taken again. We identified early signs of deterioration and how changes in vital signs affected the risk of a patient's condition becoming worse. From this we calculated a maximum risk of deterioration. We then calculated different monitoring schedules that keep individual patients below this risk level. Some of those would consume less staff time than current National Health Service guidelines suggest. We also watched staff record patients' vital signs. We learnt it takes about 5 minutes to take these measurements from each patient. This information helped us calculate how costs would change if patients' vital signs were taken more or less often. We found that patients with a low overall score could have their vital signs monitored less often without being in danger of serious harm. This frees up nursing time so that patients with a higher score can be monitored more often. Importantly, this can be achieved without employing more staff.

Evaluating the performance of the National Early Warning Score in different diagnostic groups.

BACKGROUND: The National Early Warning Score (NEWS) is used in hospitals across the UK to detect deterioration of patients within care pathways. It is used for most patients, but there are relatively few studies validating its performance in groups of patients with specific conditions. METHODS: The performance of NEWS was evaluated against 36 other Early Warning Scores, in 123 patient groups, through use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve technique, to compare the abilities of each Early Warning Score to discriminate an outcome within 24hrs of vital sign recording. Outcomes evaluated were death, ICU admission, or a combined outcome of either death or ICU admission within 24 hours of an observation set. RESULTS: The National Early Warning Score 2 performs either best or joint best within 120 of the 123 patient groups evaluated and is only outperformed in prediction of unanticipated ICU admission. When outperformed by other Early Warning Scores in the remaining 3 patient groups, the performance difference was marginal. CONCLUSIONS: Consistently high performance indicates that NEWS is a suitable early warning score to use for all diagnostic groups considered by this analysis, and patients are not disadvantaged through use of NEWS in comparison to any of the other evaluated Early Warning Scores.

How long do nursing staff take to measure and record patients' vital signs observations in hospital? A time-and-motion study.

INTRODUCTION: Monitoring vital signs in hospital is an important part of safe patient care. However, there are no robust estimates of the workload it generates for nursing staff. This makes it difficult to plan adequate staffing to ensure current monitoring protocols can be delivered. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the time taken to measure and record one set of patient's vital signs; and to identify factors associated with the time required to measure and record one set of patient's vital signs. METHODS: We undertook a time-and-motion study of 16 acute medical or surgical wards across four hospitals in England. Two trained observers followed a standard operating procedure to record the time taken to measure and record vital signs. We used mixed-effects models to estimate the mean time using whole vital signs rounds, which included equipment preparation, time spent taking vital signs at the bedside, vital signs documentation, and equipment storing. We tested whether our estimates were influenced by nurse, ward and hospital factors. RESULTS: After excluding non-vital signs related interruptions, dividing the length of a vital signs round by the number of vital signs assessments in that round yielded an estimated time per vital signs set of 5 min and 1 second (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 4:39-5:24). If interruptions within the round were included, the estimated time was 6:26 (95% CI = 6:01-6:50). If only time taking each patient's vital signs at the bedside was considered, after excluding non-vital signs related interruptions, the estimated time was 3:45 (95% CI = 3:32-3:58). We found no substantial differences by hospital, ward or nurse characteristics, despite different systems for recording vital signs being used across the hospitals. DISCUSSION: The time taken to observe and record a patient's vital signs is considerable, so changes to recommended assessment frequency could have major workload implications. Variation in estimates derived from previous studies may, in part, arise from a lack of clarity about what was included in the reported times. We found no evidence that nurses save time when using electronic vital signs recording, or that the grade of staff measuring the vital signs influenced the time taken. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring and recording vital signs is time consuming and the impact of interruptions and preparation away from the bedside is considerable. When considering the nursing workload around vital signs assessment, no assumption of relative efficiency should be made if different technologies or staff groups are deployed.

Detecting Deteriorating Patients in the Hospital: Development and Validation of a Novel Scoring System.

Rationale: Late recognition of patient deterioration in hospital is associated with worse outcomes, including higher mortality. Despite the widespread introduction of early warning score (EWS) systems and electronic health records, deterioration still goes unrecognized. Objectives: To develop and externally validate a Hospital- wide Alerting via Electronic Noticeboard (HAVEN) system to identify hospitalized patients at risk of reversible deterioration. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients 16 years of age or above admitted to four UK hospitals. The primary outcome was cardiac arrest or unplanned admission to the ICU. We used patient data (vital signs, laboratory tests, comorbidities, and frailty) from one hospital to train a machine-learning model (gradient boosting trees). We internally and externally validated the model and compared its performance with existing scoring systems (including the National EWS, laboratory-based acute physiology score, and electronic cardiac arrest risk triage score). Measurements and Main Results: We developed the HAVEN model using 230,415 patient admissions to a single hospital. We validated HAVEN on 266,295 admissions to four hospitals. HAVEN showed substantially higher discrimination (c-statistic, 0.901 [95% confidence interval, 0.898-0.903]) for the primary outcome within 24 hours of each measurement than other published scoring systems (which range from 0.700 [0.696-0.704] to 0.863 [0.860-0.865]). With a precision of 10%, HAVEN was able to identify 42% of cardiac arrests or unplanned ICU admissions with a lead time of up to 48 hours in advance, compared with 22% by the next best system. Conclusions: The HAVEN machine-learning algorithm for early identification of in-hospital deterioration significantly outperforms other published scores such as the National EWS.

Predicting hospital mortality for intensive care unit patients: Time-series analysis.

Current mortality prediction models and scoring systems for intensive care unit patients are generally usable only after at least 24 or 48 h of admission, as some parameters are unclear at admission. However, some of the most relevant measurements are available shortly following admission. It is hypothesized that outcome prediction may be made using information available in the earliest phase of intensive care unit admission. This study aims to investigate how early hospital mortality can be predicted for intensive care unit patients. We conducted a thorough time-series analysis on the performance of different data mining methods during the first 48 h of intensive care unit admission. The results showed that the discrimination power of the machine-learning classification methods after 6 h of admission outperformed the main scoring systems used in intensive care medicine (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, Simplified Acute Physiology Score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) after 48 h of admission.

Early warning score adjusted for age to predict the composite outcome of mortality, cardiac arrest or unplanned intensive care unit admission using observational vital-sign data: a multicentre development and validation.

OBJECTIVES: Early warning scores (EWS) alerting for in-hospital deterioration are commonly developed using routinely collected vital-sign data from the whole in-hospital population. As these in-hospital populations are dominated by those over the age of 45 years, resultant scores may perform less well in younger age groups. We developed and validated an age-specific early warning score (ASEWS) derived from statistical distributions of vital signs. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Oxford University Hospitals (OUH) July 2013 to March 2018 and Portsmouth Hospitals (PH) NHS Trust January 2010 to March 2017 within the Hospital Alerting Via Electronic Noticeboard database. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalised patients with electronically documented vital-sign observations OUTCOME: Composite outcome of unplanned intensive care unit admission, mortality and cardiac arrest. METHODS AND RESULTS: Statistical distributions of vital signs were used to develop an ASEWS to predict the composite outcome within 24 hours. The OUH development set consisted of 2 538 099 vital-sign observation sets from 142 806 admissions (mean age (SD): 59.8 (20.3)). We compared the performance of ASEWS to the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and our previous EWS (MCEWS) on an OUH validation set consisting of 581 571 observation sets from 25 407 emergency admissions (mean age (SD): 63.0 (21.4)) and a PH validation set consisting of 5 865 997 observation sets from 233 632 emergency admissions (mean age (SD): 64.3 (21.1)). ASEWS performed better in the 16-45 years age group in the OUH validation set (AUROC 0.820 (95% CI 0.815 to 0.824)) and PH validation set (AUROC 0.840 (95% CI 0.839 to 0.841)) than NEWS (AUROC 0.763 (95% CI 0.758 to 0.768) and AUROC 0.836 (95% CI 0.835 to 0.838) respectively) and MCEWS (AUROC 0.808 (95% CI 0.803 to 0.812) and AUROC 0.833 (95% CI 0.831 to 0.834) respectively). Differences in performance were not consistent in the elder age group. CONCLUSIONS: Accounting for age-related vital sign changes can more accurately detect deterioration in younger patients.

Nurse staffing, nursing assistants and hospital mortality: retrospective longitudinal cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between daily levels of registered nurse (RN) and nursing assistant staffing and hospital mortality. DESIGN: This is a retrospective longitudinal observational study using routinely collected data. We used multilevel/hierarchical mixed-effects regression models to explore the association between patient outcomes and daily variation in RN and nursing assistant staffing, measured as hours per patient per day relative to ward mean. Analyses were controlled for ward and patient risk. PARTICIPANTS: 138 133 adult patients spending >1 days on general wards between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2015. OUTCOMES: In-hospital deaths. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 4.1%. The hazard of death was increased by 3% for every day a patient experienced RN staffing below ward mean (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05). Relative to ward mean, each additional hour of RN care available over the first 5 days of a patient's stay was associated with 3% reduction in the hazard of death (aHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.0). Days where admissions per RN exceeded 125% of the ward mean were associated with an increased hazard of death (aHR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 1.09). Although low nursing assistant staffing was associated with increases in mortality, high nursing assistant staffing was also associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSION: Lower RN staffing and higher levels of admissions per RN are associated with increased risk of death during an admission to hospital. These findings highlight the possible consequences of reduced nurse staffing and do not give support to policies that encourage the use of nursing assistants to compensate for shortages of RNs.

The association between nurse staffing and omissions in nursing care: A systematic review.

AIMS: To identify nursing care most frequently missed in acute adult inpatient wards and to determine evidence for the association of missed care with nurse staffing. BACKGROUND: Research has established associations between nurse staffing levels and adverse patient outcomes including in-hospital mortality. However, the causal nature of this relationship is uncertain and omissions of nursing care (referred as missed care, care left undone or rationed care) have been proposed as a factor which may provide a more direct indicator of nurse staffing adequacy. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We searched the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase and Medline for quantitative studies of associations between staffing and missed care. We searched key journals, personal libraries and reference lists of articles. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently selected studies. Quality appraisal was based on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence quality appraisal checklist for studies reporting correlations and associations. Data were abstracted on study design, missed care prevalence and measures of association. Synthesis was narrative. RESULTS: Eighteen studies gave subjective reports of missed care. Seventy-five per cent or more nurses reported omitting some care. Fourteen studies found low nurse staffing levels were significantly associated with higher reports of missed care. There was little evidence that adding support workers to the team reduced missed care. CONCLUSIONS: Low Registered Nurse staffing is associated with reports of missed nursing care in hospitals. Missed care is a promising indicator of nurse staffing adequacy. The extent to which the relationships observed represent actual failures, is yet to be investigated.

What impact does nursing care left undone have on patient outcomes? Review of the literature.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Systematic review of the impact of missed nursing care on outcomes in adults, on acute hospital wards and in nursing homes. BACKGROUND: A considerable body of evidence supports the hypothesis that lower levels of registered nurses on duty increase the likelihood of patients dying on hospital wards, and the risk of many aspects of care being either delayed or left undone (missed). However, the direct consequence of missed care remains unclear. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: We searched Medline (via Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and Scopus for studies examining the association of missed nursing care and at least one patient outcome. Studies regarding registered nurses, healthcare assistants/support workers/nurses' aides were retained. Only adult settings were included. Because of the nature of the review, qualitative studies, editorials, letters and commentaries were excluded. PRISMA guidelines were followed in reporting the review. RESULTS: Fourteen studies reported associations between missed care and patient outcomes. Some studies were secondary analyses of a large parent study. Most of the studies used nurse or patient reports to capture outcomes, with some using administrative data. Four studies found significantly decreased patient satisfaction associated with missed care. Seven studies reported associations with one or more patient outcomes including medication errors, urinary tract infections, patient falls, pressure ulcers, critical incidents, quality of care and patient readmissions. Three studies investigated whether there was a link between missed care and mortality and from these results no clear associations emerged. CONCLUSIONS: The review shows the modest evidence base of studies exploring missed care and patient outcomes generated mostly from nurse and patient self-reported data. To support the assertion that nurse staffing levels and skill mix are associated with adverse outcomes as a result of missed care, more research that uses objective staffing and outcome measures is required. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Although nurses may exercise judgements in rationing care in the face of pressure, there are nonetheless adverse consequences for patients (ranging from poor experience of care to increased risk of infection, readmissions and complications due to critical incidents from undetected physiological deterioration). Hospitals should pay attention to nurses' reports of missed care and consider routine monitoring as a quality and safety indicator.

Early hospital mortality prediction of intensive care unit patients using an ensemble learning approach.

BACKGROUND: Mortality prediction of hospitalized patients is an important problem. Over the past few decades, several severity scoring systems and machine learning mortality prediction models have been developed for predicting hospital mortality. By contrast, early mortality prediction for intensive care unit patients remains an open challenge. Most research has focused on severity of illness scoring systems or data mining (DM) models designed for risk estimation at least 24 or 48h after ICU admission. OBJECTIVES: This study highlights the main data challenges in early mortality prediction in ICU patients and introduces a new machine learning based framework for Early Mortality Prediction for Intensive Care Unit patients (EMPICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The proposed method is evaluated on the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care II (MIMIC-II) database. Mortality prediction models are developed for patients at the age of 16 or above in Medical ICU (MICU), Surgical ICU (SICU) or Cardiac Surgery Recovery Unit (CSRU). We employ the ensemble learning Random Forest (RF), the predictive Decision Trees (DT), the probabilistic Naive Bayes (NB) and the rule-based Projective Adaptive Resonance Theory (PART) models. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. The explanatory variables included demographic, physiological, vital signs and laboratory test variables. Performance measures were calculated using cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) to minimize bias. 11,722 patients with single ICU stays are considered. Only patients at the age of 16 years old and above in Medical ICU (MICU), Surgical ICU (SICU) or Cardiac Surgery Recovery Unit (CSRU) are considered in this study. RESULTS: The proposed EMPICU framework outperformed standard scoring systems (SOFA, SAPS-I, APACHE-II, NEWS and qSOFA) in terms of AUROC and time (i.e. at 6h compared to 48h or more after admission). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results show that although there are many values missing in the first few hour of ICU admission, there is enough signal to effectively predict mortality during the first 6h of admission. The proposed framework, in particular the one that uses the ensemble learning approach - EMPICU Random Forest (EMPICU-RF) offers a base to construct an effective and novel mortality prediction model in the early hours of an ICU patient admission, with an improved performance profile.

A Comparison of the Ability of the Physiologic Components of Medical Emergency Team Criteria and the U.K. National Early Warning Score to Discriminate Patients at Risk of a Range of Adverse Clinical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of medical emergency team criteria and the National Early Warning Score to discriminate cardiac arrest, unanticipated ICU admission and death within 24 hours of a vital signs measurement, and to quantify the associated workload. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A large U.K. National Health Service District General Hospital. PATIENTS: Adults hospitalized from May 25, 2011, to December 31, 2013. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We applied the National Early Warning Score and 44 sets of medical emergency team criteria to a database of 2,245,778 vital signs sets (103,998 admissions). The National Early Warning Score's performance was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve and compared with sensitivity/specificity for different medical emergency team criteria. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (95% CI) for the National Early Warning Score for the combined outcome (i.e., death, cardiac arrest, or unanticipated ICU admission) was 0.88 (0.88-0.88). A National Early Warning Score value of 7 had sensitivity/specificity values of 44.5% and 97.4%, respectively. For the 44 sets of medical emergency team criteria studied, sensitivity ranged from 19.6% to 71.2% and specificity from 71.5% to 98.5%. For all outcomes, the position of the National Early Warning Score receiver-operating characteristic curve was above and to the left of all medical emergency team criteria points, indicating better discrimination. Similarly, the positions of all medical emergency team criteria points were above and to the left of the National Early Warning Score efficiency curve, indicating higher workloads (trigger rates). CONCLUSIONS: When medical emergency team systems are compared to a National Early Warning Score value of greater than or equal to 7, some medical emergency team systems have a higher sensitivity than National Early Warning Score values of greater than or equal to 7. However, all of these medical emergency team systems have a lower specificity and would generate greater workloads.

Can binary early warning scores perform as well as standard early warning scores for discriminating a patient's risk of cardiac arrest, death or unanticipated intensive care unit admission?

INTRODUCTION: Although the weightings to be summed in an early warning score (EWS) calculation are small, calculation and other errors occur frequently, potentially impacting on hospital efficiency and patient care. Use of a simpler EWS has the potential to reduce errors. METHODS: We truncated 36 published 'standard' EWSs so that, for each component, only two scores were possible: 0 when the standard EWS scored 0 and 1 when the standard EWS scored greater than 0. Using 1564,153 vital signs observation sets from 68,576 patient care episodes, we compared the discrimination (measured using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve--AUROC) of each standard EWS and its truncated 'binary' equivalent. RESULTS: The binary EWSs had lower AUROCs than the standard EWSs in most cases, although for some the difference was not significant. One system, the binary form of the National Early Warning System (NEWS), had significantly better discrimination than all standard EWSs, except for NEWS. Overall, Binary NEWS at a trigger value of 3 would detect as many adverse outcomes as are detected by NEWS using a trigger of 5, but would require a 15% higher triggering rate. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of Binary NEWS is only exceeded by that of standard NEWS. It may be that Binary NEWS, as a simplified system, can be used with fewer errors. However, its introduction could lead to significant increases in workload for ward and rapid response team staff. The balance between fewer errors and a potentially greater workload needs further investigation.

Are observation selection methods important when comparing early warning score performance?

INTRODUCTION: Sicker patients generally have more vital sign assessments, particularly immediately before an adverse outcome, and especially if the vital sign monitoring schedule is driven by an early warning score (EWS) value. This lack of independence could influence the measured discriminatory performance of an EWS. METHODS: We used a population of 1564,143 consecutive vital signs observation sets collected as a routine part of patients' care. We compared 35 published EWSs for their discrimination of the risk of death within 24h of an observation set using (1) all observations in our dataset, (2) one observation per patient care episode, chosen at random and (3) one observation per patient care episode, chosen as the closest to a randomly selected point in time in each episode. We compared the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) as a measure of discrimination for each of the 35 EWSs under each observation selection method and looked for changes in their rank order. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in rank order of the EWSs based on AUROC between the different observation selection methods, except for one EWS that included age among its components. Whichever method of observation selection was used, the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) showed the highest discrimination of risk of death within 24h. AUROCs were higher when only one observation set was used per episode of care (significantly higher for many EWSs, including NEWS). CONCLUSIONS: Vital sign measurements can be treated as if they are independent - multiple observations can be used from each episode of care--when comparing the performance and ranking of EWSs, provided no EWS includes age.

Aggregate National Early Warning Score (NEWS) values are more important than high scores for a single vital signs parameter for discriminating the risk of adverse outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The Royal College of Physicians (RCPL) National Early Warning Score (NEWS) escalates care to a doctor at NEWS values of ≥5 and when the score for any single vital sign is 3. METHODS: We calculated the 24-h risk of serious clinical outcomes for vital signs observation sets with NEWS values of 3, 4 and 5, separately determining risks when the score did/did not include a single score of 3. We compared workloads generated by the RCPL's escalation protocol and for aggregate NEWS value alone. RESULTS: Aggregate NEWS values of 3 or 4 (n=142,282) formed 15.1% of all vital signs sets measured; those containing a single vital sign scoring 3 (n=36,207) constituted 3.8% of all sets. Aggregate NEWS values of either 3 or 4 with a component score of 3 have significantly lower risks (OR: 0.26 and 0.53) than an aggregate value of 5 (OR: 1.0). Escalating care to a doctor when any single component of NEWS scores 3 compared to when aggregate NEWS values ≥5, would have increased doctors' workload by 40% with only a small increase in detected adverse outcomes from 2.99 to 3.08 per day (a 3% improvement in detection). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended NEWS escalation protocol produces additional work for the bedside nurse and responding doctor, disproportionate to a modest benefit in increased detection of adverse outcomes. It may have significant ramifications for efficient staff resource allocation, distort patient safety focus and risk alarm fatigue. Our findings suggest that the RCPL escalation guidance warrants review.

Development and validation of a decision tree early warning score based on routine laboratory test results for the discrimination of hospital mortality in emergency medical admissions.

AIM OF STUDY: To build an early warning score (EWS) based exclusively on routinely undertaken laboratory tests that might provide early discrimination of in-hospital death and could be easily implemented on paper. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a database of combined haematology and biochemistry results for 86,472 discharged adult patients for whom the admission specialty was Medicine, we used decision tree (DT) analysis to generate a laboratory decision tree early warning score (LDT-EWS) for each gender. LDT-EWS was developed for a single set (n=3496) (Q1) and validated in 22 other discrete sets each of three months long (Q2, Q3…Q23) (total n=82,976; range of n=3428 to 4093) by testing its ability to discriminate in-hospital death using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. RESULTS: The data generated slightly different models for male and female patients. The ranges of AUROC values (95% CI) for LDT-EWS with in-hospital death as the outcome for the validation sets Q2-Q23 were: 0.755 (0.727-0.783) (Q16) to 0.801 (0.776-0.826) [all patients combined, n=82,976]; 0.744 (0.704-0.784, Q16) to 0.824 (0.792-0.856, Q2) [39,591 males]; and 0.742 (0.707-0.777, Q10) to 0.826 (0.796-0.856, Q12) [43,385 females]. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that the results of commonly measured laboratory tests collected soon after hospital admission can be represented in a simple, paper-based EWS (LDT-EWS) to discriminate in-hospital mortality. We hypothesise that, with appropriate modification, it might be possible to extend the use of LDT-EWS throughout the patient's hospital stay.

Which is more useful in predicting hospital mortality--dichotomised blood test results or actual test values? A retrospective study in two hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Routine blood tests are an integral part of clinical medicine and in interpreting blood test results clinicians have two broad options. (1) Dichotomise the blood tests into normal/abnormal or (2) use the actual values and overlook the reference values. We refer to these as the "binary" and the "non-binary" strategy respectively. We investigate which strategy is better at predicting the risk of death in hospital based on seven routinely undertaken blood tests (albumin, creatinine, haemoglobin, potassium, sodium, urea, and white blood cell count) using tree models to implement the two strategies. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective database study of emergency admissions to an acute hospital during April 2009 to March 2010, involving 10,050 emergency admissions with routine blood tests undertaken within 24 hours of admission. We compared the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve for predicting in-hospital mortality using the binary and non-binary strategy. RESULTS: The mortality rate was 6.98% (701/10050). The mean predicted risk of death in those who died was significantly (p-value <0.0001) lower using the binary strategy (risk = 0.181 95%CI: 0.193 to 0.210) versus the non-binary strategy (risk = 0.222 95%CI: 0.194 to 0.251), representing a risk difference of 28.74 deaths in the deceased patients (n = 701). The binary strategy had a significantly (p-value <0.0001) lower area under the ROC curve of 0.832 (95% CI: 0.819 to 0.845) versus the non-binary strategy (0.853 95% CI: 0.840 to 0.867). Similar results were obtained using data from another hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Dichotomising routine blood test results is less accurate in predicting in-hospital mortality than using actual test values because it underestimates the risk of death in patients who died. Further research into the use of actual blood test values in clinical decision making is required especially as the infrastructure to implement this potentially promising strategy already exists in most hospitals.

A study of the effectiveness of ergonomically-based functional screening tests and their relationship to reducing worker compensation injuries.

OBJECTIVES: This paper summarizes a series of studies of the effectiveness of ergonomically based functional screening tests for post offer pre-placement of applicants for physically demanding jobs, and their relationship to reducing worker compensation injuries. Three predictive validation studies and a meta-analysis of injury rates pre- and post-implementation of physical ability testing at 175 locations are included. METHODS: The strength and energy expenditure demands of physically-strenuous warehouse jobs in three industries were documented through ergonomic analysis. A battery of strength and endurance tests were developed to assess applicants' abilities to meet the measured physical demands. Predictive validation studies were performed for the jobs in each of the three industries. In each study, new-hires were given the physical ability test battery and then placed on the job. Management was not informed of the results of the tests. Injury experience and work history were then monitored over a two year period in each study. Injury rates and retention were then compared for individuals who passed and individuals who failed the battery. As the battery was implemented in other locations, the injury rate for individuals starting employment in the year prior to implementation was compared to the injury rate for individuals starting employment in the year after implementation. CONCLUSIONS: A meta-analysis of the three predictive validation studies indicated that new-hires who passed the battery had a 47% lower worker compensation injury rate and 21% higher retention. A meta-analysis of the 175 pre/post-implementation studies indicated a 41% reduction in worker compensation injuries associated with implementation of ergonomically based physical ability tests.

An RFID-based system for assisted living: challenges and solutions.

Radio-frequency Identification (RFID) offers a potentially flexible and low cost method of locating objects and tracking people within buildings. RFID systems generally require less infrastructure to be installed than other solutions but have their own limitations. As part of an assisted living system, RFID tools may be useful to locate lost objects, support blind and partially sighted people with daily living activities and assist in the rehabilitation of adults with acquired brain injury. This paper outlines the requirements and the role of RFID in assisting people in these three areas. The development of a prototype RFID home support tool is described and some of the issues and challenges raised are discussed. The system is designed to support assisted living for elderly and infirm people in a simple, usable and extensible way in particular for supporting the finding and identification of commonly used and lost objects such as spectacles. This approach can also be used to extend the tagged domain to commonly visited areas, and provide support for the analysis of common activities, and rehabilitation.

The role of cathepsin C in Papillon-Lefèvre syndrome, prepubertal periodontitis, and aggressive periodontitis.

We have previously reported that loss-of-function mutations in the cathepsin C gene (CTSC) result in Papillon-Lefèvre syndrome, an autosomal recessive condition characterized by palmoplantar keratosis and early-onset, severe periodontitis. Others have also reported CTSC mutations in patients with severe prepubertal periodontitis, but without any skin manifestations. The possible role of CTSC variants in more common types of non-mendelian, early-onset, severe periodontitis ("aggressive periodontitis") has not been investigated. In this study, we have investigated the role of CTSC in all three conditions. We demonstrate that PLS is genetically homogeneous and the mutation spectrum that includes three novel mutations (c.386T>A/p.V129E, c.935A>G/p.Q312R, and c.1235A>G/p.Y412C) in 21 PLS families (including eight from our previous study) provides an insight into structure-function relationships of CTSC. Our data also suggest that a complete loss-of-function appears to be necessary for the manifestation of the phenotype, making it unlikely that weak CTSC mutations are a cause of aggressive periodontitis. This was confirmed by analyses of the CTSC activity in 30 subjects with aggressive periodontitis and age-sex matched controls, which demonstrated that there was no significant difference between these two groups (1,728.7 +/- SD 576.8 micro moles/mg/min vs. 1,678.7 +/- SD 527.2 micro moles/mg/min, respectively, p = 0.73). CTSC mutations were detected in only one of two families with prepubertal periodontitis; these did not form a separate functional class with respect to those observed in classical PLS. The affected individuals in the other prepubertal periodontitis family not only lacked CTSC mutations, but in addition did not share the haplotypes at the CTSC locus. These data suggest that prepubertal periodontitis is a genetically heterogeneous disease that, in some families, just represents a partially penetrant PLS.