RESUMO
Introduction The modified early warning score (mEWS) has been used to identify decompensating patients in critical care settings, potentially leading to better outcomes and safer, more cost-effective patient care. We examined whether the admission or maximum mEWS of neurosurgical patients was associated with outcomes and total patient costs across neurosurgical procedures. Methods This retrospective cohort study included all patients hospitalized at a quaternary care hospital for neurosurgery procedures during 2019. mEWS were automatically generated during a patient's hospitalization from data available in the electronic medical record. Primary and secondary outcome measures were the first mEWS at admission, maximum mEWS during hospitalization, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, mortality, cost of hospitalization, and patient biomarkers (i.e., white blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin). Results In 1,408 patients evaluated, a mean first mEWS of 0.5 ± 0.9 (median: 0) and maximum mEWS of 2.6 ± 1.4 (median: 2) were observed. The maximum mEWS was achieved on average one day (median = 0 days) after admission and correlated with other biomarkers (p < 0.0001). Scores correlated with continuous outcomes (i.e., LOS and cost) distinctly based on disease types. Multivariate analysis showed that the maximum mEWS was associated with longer stay (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.6-1.96, p = 0.0001), worse disposition (OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.71-0.95, p = 0.0001), higher mortality (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3-2.1, p = 0.0001), and greater cost (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1-1.3, p = 0.001). Machine learning algorithms suggested that logistic regression, naïve Bayes, and neural networks were most predictive of outcomes. Conclusion mEWS was associated with outcomes in neurosurgical patients and may be clinically useful. The composite score could be integrated with other clinical factors and was associated with LOS, discharge disposition, mortality, and patient cost. mEWS also could be used early during a patient's admission to stratify risk. Increase in mEWS scores correlated with the outcome to a different degree in distinct patient/disease types. These results show the potential of the mEWS to predict outcomes in neurosurgical patients and suggest that it could be incorporated into clinical decision-making and/or monitoring of neurosurgical patients during admission. However, further studies and refinement of mEWS are needed to better integrate it into patient care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Evidence supports streamlined approaches for inpatients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) including early transition to oral antibiotics and shorter therapy. Uptake of these approaches is variable, and the best approaches to local implementation of infection-specific guidelines are unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool linked with a clinical pathway on CAP care. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational pre-post intervention study of inpatients with pneumonia admitted to a single academic medical center. Interventions were introduced in 3 sequential 6-month phases; Phase 1: education alone; Phase 2: education and a CDS-driven CAP pathway coupled with active antimicrobial stewardship and provider feedback; and Phase 3: education and a CDS-driven CAP pathway without active stewardship. The 12 months preceding the intervention were used as a baseline. Primary outcomes were length of intravenous antibiotic therapy and total length of antibiotic therapy. Clinical, process, and cost outcomes were also measured. RESULTS: The study included 1021 visits. Phase 2 was associated with significantly lower length of intravenous and total antibiotic therapy, higher procalcitonin lab utilization, and a 20% cost reduction compared with baseline. Phase 3 was associated with significantly lower length of intravenous antibiotic therapy and higher procalcitonin lab utilization compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: A CDS-driven CAP pathway supplemented by active antimicrobial stewardship review led to the most robust improvements in antibiotic use and decreased costs with similar clinical outcomes.