A-qCPR risk score screening model for predicting 1-year mortality associated with hospice and palliative care in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the need for palliative care and predicting its mortality play important roles in the emergency department. AIM: We developed a screening model for predicting 1-year mortality. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to identify risk factors associated with 1-year mortality. Our risk scores based on these significant risk factors were then developed. Its predictive validity performance was evaluated using area under receiving operating characteristic analysis and leave-one-out cross-validation. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 15 years or older were enrolled from June 2015 to May 2016 in the emergency department. RESULTS: We identified five independent risk factors, each of which was assigned a number of points proportional to its estimated regression coefficient: age (0.05 points per year), qSOFA ⩾ 2 (1), Cancer (4), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score ⩾ 2 (2), and Do-Not-Resuscitate status (3). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of our screening tool given the cutoff larger than 3 points were 0.99 (0.98-0.99), 0.31 (0.29-0.32), 0.26 (0.24-0.27), and 0.99 (0.98-1.00), respectively. Those with screening scores larger than 9 points corresponding to 64.0% (60.0-67.9%) of 1-year mortality were prioritized for consultation and communication. The area under the receiving operating characteristic curves for the point system was 0.84 (0.83-0.85) for the cross-validation model. CONCLUSIONS: A-qCPR risk scores provide a good screening tool for assessing patient prognosis. Routine screening for end-of-life using this tool plays an important role in early and efficient physician-patient communications regarding hospice and palliative needs in the emergency department.

The impact of door-to-electrocardiogram time on door-to-balloon time after achieving the guideline-recommended target rate.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the components and contributing factors of door-to-balloon time after implementation of Door-to-Balloon Alliance quality-improving (QI) strategies, including the impact of door-to-ECG time on door-to-balloon time. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether modification of emergency department (ED) triage processes could improve door-to-ECG and door-to-balloon times after implementation of QI strategies. METHODS: This was a retrospective before-and-after study of a prospectively collected database. From June 2014 to October 2014, interventions were implemented in our ED, including a protocol-driven ECG initiation and moving an ECG station and technician to the triage area. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who received ECG within 10 min of arrival; the secondary outcome was the percentage of patients with door-to-balloon times of <90 min from arrival. Patients from the year pre- and post-QI initiative were defined as the control and intervention groups, respectively. RESULTS: Enrollment comprised 214 patients with STEMI: 109 before the intervention and 105 after the intervention. We analyzed the components of the door-to-balloon process and found the door-to-ECG process was the most critical interval of delay (20.8%). Unrecognized symptoms were the most common cause of delay in the door-to-ECG process resulting in a significant impact on the door-to-balloon time. The intervention group had a higher percentage of patients with door-to-ECG times <10 min than did the control group (93.3% vs. 79.8%, p = 0.005), with a corresponding improvement in door-to-balloon times <90 min (91.1% vs. 76.2%, p = 0.007). In subgroup analysis, the intervention benefits occurred only in non-transferred or walk-in patients. After adjustment for possible co-variates, the QI interventions remained a significant contributing factor for achieving the door-to-ECG and door-to-balloon targets. CONCLUSIONS: The modification of ED triage processes through implementation of QI strategies are effective in achieving better door-to-ECG times and thus, achieving door-to-balloon times <90 min. In patients presenting with ambiguous symptoms, improved door-to ECG target achievement rates, through a protocol-driven and multidisciplinary approach allows for earlier identification of STEMI.