H-J Schuijt, F M M Oud, E J R Bruns, P van Duijvendijk, H J Van der Zaag-Loonen, P E Spies, B C van Munster
{"title":"荷兰安全管理项目能否预测急诊科老年患者的不良后果?","authors":"H-J Schuijt, F M M Oud, E J R Bruns, P van Duijvendijk, H J Van der Zaag-Loonen, P E Spies, B C van Munster","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Frailty screening in the emergency department may identify frail patients at risk for adverse outcomes. This study investigated if the Dutch Safety Management Program (VMS) screener predicts outcomes in older patients in the emergency department.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective cohort study, patients aged 70 years or older presenting to the emergency department were recruited on workdays between 10:00 AM and 7:00 PM from May 2017 until August 2017. Patients were screened in four domains: activities of daily living, malnutrition, risk of delirium, and risk of falling. After 90 days of follow up, mortality, functional decline, living situation, falls, readmission to the emergency department, and readmission to the hospital were recorded. VMS was studied using the total VMS score as a predictor with ROC curve analysis, and using a cut-off point to divide patients into frail and non-frail groups to calculate positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 249 patients were included. Higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality (AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.76) and falling (AUC 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.78). VMS frailty predicted mortality (PPV 0.15, NPV 0.94, p = 0.05) and falling (PPV 0.22, NPV 0.92, p = 0.02), but none of the other outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this selected group of patients, higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality and falls. The low positive predictive value shows that the VMS screener is unsuitable for identifying high-risk patients in the ED. The high negative predictive value indicates that the screener can identify patients not at risk for adverse medical outcomes. This could be useful to determine which patients should undergo additional screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":18918,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Journal of Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the Dutch Safety Management Program predict adverse outcomes for older patients in the emergency department?\",\"authors\":\"H-J Schuijt, F M M Oud, E J R Bruns, P van Duijvendijk, H J Van der Zaag-Loonen, P E Spies, B C van Munster\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Frailty screening in the emergency department may identify frail patients at risk for adverse outcomes. This study investigated if the Dutch Safety Management Program (VMS) screener predicts outcomes in older patients in the emergency department.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective cohort study, patients aged 70 years or older presenting to the emergency department were recruited on workdays between 10:00 AM and 7:00 PM from May 2017 until August 2017. Patients were screened in four domains: activities of daily living, malnutrition, risk of delirium, and risk of falling. After 90 days of follow up, mortality, functional decline, living situation, falls, readmission to the emergency department, and readmission to the hospital were recorded. VMS was studied using the total VMS score as a predictor with ROC curve analysis, and using a cut-off point to divide patients into frail and non-frail groups to calculate positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 249 patients were included. Higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality (AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.76) and falling (AUC 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.78). VMS frailty predicted mortality (PPV 0.15, NPV 0.94, p = 0.05) and falling (PPV 0.22, NPV 0.92, p = 0.02), but none of the other outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this selected group of patients, higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality and falls. The low positive predictive value shows that the VMS screener is unsuitable for identifying high-risk patients in the ED. The high negative predictive value indicates that the screener can identify patients not at risk for adverse medical outcomes. This could be useful to determine which patients should undergo additional screening.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Netherlands Journal of Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Netherlands Journal of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Netherlands Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:在急诊科进行虚弱筛查可以识别出有不良后果风险的虚弱患者。本研究调查了荷兰安全管理计划(VMS)筛选是否能预测急诊科老年患者的预后。方法:在这项前瞻性队列研究中,在2017年5月至2017年8月的工作日上午10:00至晚上7:00之间招募了70岁或以上的急诊科患者。患者在四个方面进行筛选:日常生活活动,营养不良,谵妄的风险和跌倒的风险。随访90天后,记录死亡率、功能下降、生活状况、跌倒、再次入住急诊科和再次入住医院。VMS研究采用VMS总分作为预测指标,采用ROC曲线分析,并采用截断点将患者分为体弱组和非体弱组,计算阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。结果:共纳入249例患者。较高的VMS评分与90天死亡率(AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.76)和下降(AUC 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.78)相关。VMS虚弱预测死亡率(PPV 0.15, NPV 0.94, p = 0.05)和跌倒(PPV 0.22, NPV 0.92, p = 0.02),但其他结果均无预测。结论:在这组患者中,较高的VMS评分与90天死亡率和跌倒有关。低阳性预测值表明VMS筛查不适合识别急诊科的高危患者。高阴性预测值表明该筛查可以识别无不良医疗结局风险的患者。这可能有助于确定哪些患者应该接受额外的筛查。
Does the Dutch Safety Management Program predict adverse outcomes for older patients in the emergency department?
Purpose: Frailty screening in the emergency department may identify frail patients at risk for adverse outcomes. This study investigated if the Dutch Safety Management Program (VMS) screener predicts outcomes in older patients in the emergency department.
Methods: In this prospective cohort study, patients aged 70 years or older presenting to the emergency department were recruited on workdays between 10:00 AM and 7:00 PM from May 2017 until August 2017. Patients were screened in four domains: activities of daily living, malnutrition, risk of delirium, and risk of falling. After 90 days of follow up, mortality, functional decline, living situation, falls, readmission to the emergency department, and readmission to the hospital were recorded. VMS was studied using the total VMS score as a predictor with ROC curve analysis, and using a cut-off point to divide patients into frail and non-frail groups to calculate positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).
Results: A total of 249 patients were included. Higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality (AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.76) and falling (AUC 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.78). VMS frailty predicted mortality (PPV 0.15, NPV 0.94, p = 0.05) and falling (PPV 0.22, NPV 0.92, p = 0.02), but none of the other outcomes.
Conclusion: In this selected group of patients, higher VMS score was associated with 90-day mortality and falls. The low positive predictive value shows that the VMS screener is unsuitable for identifying high-risk patients in the ED. The high negative predictive value indicates that the screener can identify patients not at risk for adverse medical outcomes. This could be useful to determine which patients should undergo additional screening.
期刊介绍:
The Netherlands Journal of Medicine publishes papers in all relevant fields of internal medicine. In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, reviews on topics of interest or importance, case reports, book reviews and letters to the editor are welcomed.