Pediatric ED Saves: Analyzing the ED Screen of Direct Admissions.

IF 1.2 Q3 PEDIATRICS
Pediatric quality & safety Pub Date : 2023-08-07 eCollection Date: 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1097/pq9.0000000000000678
Fatima Ramirez-Cueva, Gary Prusky Grinberg, Ann Marie Kuchinski, Robert Gibson, Hongyan Xu, Li Fang Zhang, Desiree Seeyave
{"title":"Pediatric ED Saves: Analyzing the ED Screen of Direct Admissions.","authors":"Fatima Ramirez-Cueva, Gary Prusky Grinberg, Ann Marie Kuchinski, Robert Gibson, Hongyan Xu, Li Fang Zhang, Desiree Seeyave","doi":"10.1097/pq9.0000000000000678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Direct admissions (DAs) are a routine hospital entry portal with few guidelines to assess patient safety during this process. This study assessed the effectiveness of an institutional screen for patients presenting as DA. It investigated patient variables that may predict appropriateness for DA and those at high risk for deterioration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study includes patients who received the institutional screen between June 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. We placed charts into three groups: group 1 (stable), group 2 (unstable), and group 3 (stable then transferred to pediatric intensive care unit within 6 hours). We assessed effectiveness by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. We used comparative analysis between groups to identify patients safe for DA and those at high risk for deterioration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The screen was 80% sensitive and 100% specific, predicting 97.7% of stable patients. Of the 652 charts reviewed, 384 met the inclusion criteria. Group 1 (31.60, 26.45%, 5.23%) had lower respiratory rate, respiratory diagnosis, and oxygen requirement compared to group 2 (45.00, 78.13%, 15.63%) and group 3 (44.50, 75.00%, 50.00%). For SpO<sub>2</sub>, group 1 (98.70) was higher than group 2 (96.03). For the Pediatric Early Warning Score, group 2 (1.72) was higher than group 1 (0.31) and group 3 (0.63).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The institutional screen is an effective tool to identify patients presenting as DA needing immediate emergency department intervention and/or pediatric intensive care unit care. The screen benefits patients with a respiratory diagnosis, oxygen requirement, high respiratory rate or low SpO<sub>2</sub>.</p>","PeriodicalId":74412,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric quality & safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6b/37/pqs-8-e678.PMC10402936.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric quality & safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Direct admissions (DAs) are a routine hospital entry portal with few guidelines to assess patient safety during this process. This study assessed the effectiveness of an institutional screen for patients presenting as DA. It investigated patient variables that may predict appropriateness for DA and those at high risk for deterioration.

Methods: The study includes patients who received the institutional screen between June 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. We placed charts into three groups: group 1 (stable), group 2 (unstable), and group 3 (stable then transferred to pediatric intensive care unit within 6 hours). We assessed effectiveness by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. We used comparative analysis between groups to identify patients safe for DA and those at high risk for deterioration.

Results: The screen was 80% sensitive and 100% specific, predicting 97.7% of stable patients. Of the 652 charts reviewed, 384 met the inclusion criteria. Group 1 (31.60, 26.45%, 5.23%) had lower respiratory rate, respiratory diagnosis, and oxygen requirement compared to group 2 (45.00, 78.13%, 15.63%) and group 3 (44.50, 75.00%, 50.00%). For SpO2, group 1 (98.70) was higher than group 2 (96.03). For the Pediatric Early Warning Score, group 2 (1.72) was higher than group 1 (0.31) and group 3 (0.63).

Conclusions: The institutional screen is an effective tool to identify patients presenting as DA needing immediate emergency department intervention and/or pediatric intensive care unit care. The screen benefits patients with a respiratory diagnosis, oxygen requirement, high respiratory rate or low SpO2.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

儿科急诊室救治:分析急诊室直接入院筛查。
直接入院(DA)是医院的一个常规入院途径,但在此过程中几乎没有评估患者安全的指南。本研究评估了对直接入院患者进行机构筛查的有效性。研究还调查了可预测是否适合直接入院以及病情恶化高风险患者的患者变量:研究对象包括在 2019 年 6 月 1 日至 2020 年 5 月 31 日期间接受机构筛查的患者。我们将病历分为三组:第 1 组(病情稳定)、第 2 组(病情不稳定)和第 3 组(病情稳定后在 6 小时内转入儿科重症监护室)。我们通过计算灵敏度、特异性和预测值来评估有效性。我们通过组间比较分析来确定哪些患者可以接受DA治疗,哪些患者病情恶化的风险较高:筛查的敏感性为 80%,特异性为 100%,可预测 97.7% 的病情稳定患者。在审查的 652 份病历中,有 384 份符合纳入标准。与第 2 组(45.00, 78.13%, 15.63%)和第 3 组(44.50, 75.00%, 50.00%)相比,第 1 组(31.60, 26.45%, 5.23%)的呼吸频率、呼吸诊断和氧气需求较低。在 SpO2 方面,第 1 组(98.70)高于第 2 组(96.03)。在儿科预警评分方面,第 2 组(1.72)高于第 1 组(0.31)和第 3 组(0.63):机构筛查是一种有效的工具,可以识别出需要急诊科立即干预和/或儿科重症监护室护理的 DA 患者。该筛查对有呼吸系统诊断、需氧、高呼吸频率或低 SpO2 的患者有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信