Hussein J Hassan, Ryan G Belecanech, Peter J Leary, Gray R Lyons, Clifford R Weiss, Jennifer C Yui, Hamza Aziz, Bo S Kim, David N Hager, Todd M Kolb
{"title":"Effects of Implementing a Standardized Risk Stratification and Triage Workflow for an Established Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT).","authors":"Hussein J Hassan, Ryan G Belecanech, Peter J Leary, Gray R Lyons, Clifford R Weiss, Jennifer C Yui, Hamza Aziz, Bo S Kim, David N Hager, Todd M Kolb","doi":"10.1513/AnnalsATS.202412-1301OC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Rationale:</b> The Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) model was developed to facilitate multi-specialty decision making and expedite therapeutic interventions for patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). PERT implementation has previously been associated with survival benefit in some studies, though specific workflow components that confer survival benefit have not been identified. <b>Methods:</b> As a quality improvement initiative, we implemented three specific workflow interventions to an existing PERT program at an academic medical center: 1) designated triage responsibility to a specific group of providers; 2) assigned guideline-based risk stratification to all calls at triage; and 3) established ICU admission guidelines based on risk stratification. We used the electronic medical record to review clinical outcomes for all PERT calls for 2-years after implementing the revised workflow and compared these to outcomes for the preceding 2-year period. We used logistic regression to compare the odds of in-hospital mortality before and after the workflow revision, with multiple models adjusted for clinically relevant variables. <b>Results:</b> During the study period (2019-2023) there were 420 unique patient PERT activations with confirmed PE; 253 patients were managed using the revised workflow and 167 patients were managed using the historical workflow. The proportion of patients meeting the primary endpoint of in-hospital death at 30-days following the workflow revisions was significantly lower than during the historical period (6.3% vs. 18.0%, P < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated the revised PERT workflow to have a protective effect against in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16-0.59; P < 0.001). This mortality benefit remained significant after adjustment for demographics, clinical factors, hemodynamic instability, Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) Class, or Bova Stage. The workflow revisions were also associated with increased use of advanced therapies but did not change the proportion of patients with major bleeding or ICU or hospital length of stay. <b>Conclusions:</b> In an existing PERT program, implementation of three specific workflow revisions centered around risk stratification and level of care triage improved survival for patients with PE. These findings suggest that incorporation of a standardized approach and risk stratification are valuable components of the PERT response.</p>","PeriodicalId":93876,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the American Thoracic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202412-1301OC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rationale: The Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) model was developed to facilitate multi-specialty decision making and expedite therapeutic interventions for patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). PERT implementation has previously been associated with survival benefit in some studies, though specific workflow components that confer survival benefit have not been identified. Methods: As a quality improvement initiative, we implemented three specific workflow interventions to an existing PERT program at an academic medical center: 1) designated triage responsibility to a specific group of providers; 2) assigned guideline-based risk stratification to all calls at triage; and 3) established ICU admission guidelines based on risk stratification. We used the electronic medical record to review clinical outcomes for all PERT calls for 2-years after implementing the revised workflow and compared these to outcomes for the preceding 2-year period. We used logistic regression to compare the odds of in-hospital mortality before and after the workflow revision, with multiple models adjusted for clinically relevant variables. Results: During the study period (2019-2023) there were 420 unique patient PERT activations with confirmed PE; 253 patients were managed using the revised workflow and 167 patients were managed using the historical workflow. The proportion of patients meeting the primary endpoint of in-hospital death at 30-days following the workflow revisions was significantly lower than during the historical period (6.3% vs. 18.0%, P < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated the revised PERT workflow to have a protective effect against in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16-0.59; P < 0.001). This mortality benefit remained significant after adjustment for demographics, clinical factors, hemodynamic instability, Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) Class, or Bova Stage. The workflow revisions were also associated with increased use of advanced therapies but did not change the proportion of patients with major bleeding or ICU or hospital length of stay. Conclusions: In an existing PERT program, implementation of three specific workflow revisions centered around risk stratification and level of care triage improved survival for patients with PE. These findings suggest that incorporation of a standardized approach and risk stratification are valuable components of the PERT response.
理由:肺栓塞反应小组(PERT)模型的建立是为了促进多专业决策和加快肺栓塞(PE)患者的治疗干预。在之前的一些研究中,PERT的实施与生存效益有关,尽管还没有确定特定的工作流组件赋予生存效益。方法:作为一项质量改进计划,我们对一家学术医疗中心现有的PERT项目实施了三种具体的工作流程干预措施:1)将分诊责任指定给一组特定的提供者;2)在分诊时对所有呼叫进行基于指南的风险分层;3)建立基于风险分层的ICU入院指南。在实施修订后的工作流程后,我们使用电子病历来审查所有PERT呼叫的2年临床结果,并将这些结果与前2年的结果进行比较。我们使用逻辑回归来比较工作流程修订前后的住院死亡率,并根据临床相关变量调整了多个模型。结果:在研究期间(2019-2023年),有420例确诊PE的独特患者PERT激活;253例患者使用修订后的工作流程进行管理,167例患者使用历史工作流程进行管理。在工作流程修订后30天达到院内死亡主要终点的患者比例显著低于历史期间(6.3% vs. 18.0%, P < 0.001)。Logistic回归分析表明,修订后的PERT工作流程对院内死亡率有保护作用(OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16-0.59;P < 0.001)。在调整了人口统计学、临床因素、血流动力学不稳定性、肺栓塞严重程度指数(PESI)等级或Bova分期后,这一死亡率获益仍然显著。工作流程的修订也与先进疗法的使用增加有关,但没有改变大出血患者的比例、ICU或住院时间。结论:在现有的PERT项目中,实施以风险分层和护理分诊水平为中心的三个特定工作流程修订提高了PE患者的生存率。这些发现表明,标准化方法和风险分层的结合是PERT反应的重要组成部分。