Clinical Decision Instrument Research Articles

A clinical decision instrument for head CT in intoxicated patients presenting to the emergency department: the DITCH study

Performing head CT in intoxicated patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) is common, yet low yield. In our previous study, acute findings were found only in patients with at least one of: neurological Deficits, Intubation, Trauma, Convulsions or Headache. We hypothesise that the absence of these DITCH clinical features rules out the need for immediate CT. We collected data for intoxicated patients attending EDs in our district from March 2021 to May 2022 inclusive. We recorded clinical presentation features, agents, disposition and head CT results. There were 1,308 intoxicated patients out of a total of 219,273 ED presentations. Median age was 38 years. Common ingestions were ethanol, stimulants, GABA-ergics and opioids. 407 patients (31%) had head CT, with 31 patients (7.6%) having 36 acute findings: 19 intracranial haemorrhages, 8 fractures, 2 cerebral oedema and 7 haematomas. All patients with acute CT findings had one of the DITCH features, and all had trauma. The sensitivity and NPV of the hypothesis were 100%. In patients that were not scanned, there were no re-presentations.Our internal validation study is further evidence that acute findings on head CT in intoxicated patients presenting to the ED are only found in those who had one of the DITCH features.

Effect of the Extended Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma on the Screening Performance of the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study Chest Decision Instrument.

Developed to decrease unnecessary thoracic computed tomography use in adult blunt trauma patients, the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) Chest clinical decision instrument does not include the extended Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (eFAST). We assessed whether eFAST improves the NEXUS Chest clinical decision instrument's diagnostic performance and may replace the chest radiograph (CXR) as a predictor variable. We performed a secondary analysis of prospective data from 8 Level I trauma centers from 2011-2014. We compared performance of modified clinical decision instruments that (1) added eFAST as a predictor (eFAST-added clinical decision instrument), and (2) replaced CXR with eFAST (eFAST-replaced clinical decision instrument), in screening for blunt thoracic injuries. One thousand nine hundred fifty-seven patients had documented computed tomography, CXR, clinical NEXUS criteria, and adequate eFAST; 624 (31.9%) patients had blunt thoracic injuries, and 126 (6.4%) had major injuries. Compared to the NEXUS Chest clinical decision instrument, the eFAST-added clinical decision instrument demonstrated unchanged screening performance for major injury (sensitivity 0.98 [0.94 to 1.00], specificity 0.28 [0.26 to 0.30]) or any injury (sensitivity 0.97 [0.95 to 0.98], specificity 0.21 [0.19 to 0.23]). The eFAST-replaced clinical decision instrument demonstrated unchanged sensitivity for major injury (sensitivity 0.93 [0.87 to 0.97], specificity 0.31 [0.29 to 0.34]) and decreased sensitivity for any injury (0.93 [0.91 to 0.951] versus 0.97 [0.953 to 0.98]). In our secondary analysis, adding eFAST as a predictor variable did not improve the diagnostic screening performance of the original NEXUS Chest clinical decision instrument; eFAST cannot replace the CXR criterion of the NEXUS Chest clinical decision instrument.

Physical Examination Sensitivity for Skull Fracture in Pediatric Patients With Blunt Head Trauma: A Secondary Analysis of the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II Head Computed Tomography Validation Study.

We evaluated the emergency department (ED) providers' ability to detect skull fractures in pediatric patients presenting with blunt head trauma. This was a secondary analysis of the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) Head computed tomography (CT) validation study. Demographics and clinical characteristics were analyzed for pediatric patients. Radiologist interpretations of head CT imaging were abstracted and cataloged. Detection of skull fractures was evaluated through provider response to specific clinical decision instrument criteria (NEXUS or Canadian head CT rules) at the time of initial patient evaluation. The presence of skull fracture was determined by formal radiologist interpretation of CT imaging. Between April 2006, and December 2015, 1,018 pediatric patients were enrolled. One hundred twenty-eight (12.5%) children had a notable injury reported on CT head. Skull fracture was present in most (66.4%) children with intracranial injuries. The sensitivity and specificity of provider physical examination to detect skull fractures was 18.5% (95% confidence interval 10.5% to 28.7%) and 96.6% (95.3% to 97.7%), respectively. The most common injuries associated with skull fractures were subarachnoid hemorrhage (27%) and subdural hematoma (22.3%). Skull fracture is common in children with intracranial injury after blunt head trauma. Despite this, providers were found to have poor sensitivity for skull fractures in this population, and these injuries may be missed on initial emergency department assessment.

The LIMIT-NI clinical decision instrument reduces neuroimaging compared to unstructured clinician judgement in recurrent seizure patients

ObjectiveThe LIMIT clinical decision instrument (CDI) was published in 2021 to safely reduce neuroimaging in patients with recurrent seizures. The LIMIT CDI had a sensitivity of 90%, negative predictive value of >99.9%, and reduced neuroimaging by 13.3%. However, the design of the original LIMIT CDI made it cumbersome to use. The goal of this study was to validate the streamlined LIMIT-NeuroImaging (LIMIT-NI) CDI and compare its performance to the original LIMIT CDI. MethodsThis was an observational study of patients presenting to three emergency departments with recurrent seizures. The LIMIT-NI CDI was applied to all patients. We calculated the test characteristics of the LIMIT-NI CDI and compared it to unstructured clinical judgement. Results3401 patients were screened, and 2125 patients were included in the final analysis. 16 patients (0.75%) had positive CTs; Both the LIMIT-NI CDI and clinician judgement identified all 16 patients with a sensitivity of 100.0% and a negative predictive value of 100.0%. Using unstructured clinical judgement, emergency providers ordered 835 brain CTs, while only 499 brain CTs would have been ordered using the CDI, a reduction of 15.8% (relative reduction 40.2%). ConclusionThe LIMIT-NI CDI demonstrated greater ease of application and improved test characteristics compared to the original LIMIT CDI. Compared to unstructured clinician judgement, the LIMIT-NI CDI reduced neuroimaging by 15.8% (relative reduction 40.2%) in recurrent seizure patients. The LIMIT-NI CDI can be used by physicians along with clinical judgement to reduce neuroimaging in the recurrent seizure patient.

145 External Validation of the Non-Ischemic Troponin Rule Out in Acute Heart Failure (NITRO-AHF) Decision Instrument for Acute Myocardial Infarction or Revascularization

Non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicates around 10% of emergency department (ED) presentations for acute heart failure (AHF), while non-ischemic troponin elevation occurs in over 40%. We had two primary objectives: 1. Validate the recently-derived 2-variable non-ischemic troponin rule out in AHF (NITRO-AHF) clinical decision instrument (CDI) for predicting AMI or 30-day revascularization, and 2. Test whether addition of serial troponin measurement adds value to the original CDI.

Predictability and stability testing to assess clinical decision instrument performance for children after blunt torso trauma.

The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) has developed a clinical-decision instrument (CDI) to identify children at very low risk of intra-abdominal injury. However, the CDI has not been externally validated. We sought to vet the PECARN CDI with the Predictability Computability Stability (PCS) data science framework, potentially increasing its chance of a successful external validation. We performed a secondary analysis of two prospectively collected datasets: PECARN (12,044 children from 20 emergency departments) and an independent external validation dataset from the Pediatric Surgical Research Collaborative (PedSRC; 2,188 children from 14 emergency departments). We used PCS to reanalyze the original PECARN CDI along with new interpretable PCS CDIs developed using the PECARN dataset. External validation was then measured on the PedSRC dataset. Three predictor variables (abdominal wall trauma, Glasgow Coma Scale Score <14, and abdominal tenderness) were found to be stable. A CDI using only these three variables would achieve lower sensitivity than the original PECARN CDI with seven variables on internal PECARN validation but achieve the same performance on external PedSRC validation (sensitivity 96.8% and specificity 44%). Using only these variables, we developed a PCS CDI which had a lower sensitivity than the original PECARN CDI on internal PECARN validation but performed the same on external PedSRC validation (sensitivity 96.8% and specificity 44%). The PCS data science framework vetted the PECARN CDI and its constituent predictor variables prior to external validation. We found that the 3 stable predictor variables represented all of the PECARN CDI's predictive performance on independent external validation. The PCS framework offers a less resource-intensive method than prospective validation to vet CDIs before external validation. We also found that the PECARN CDI will generalize well to new populations and should be prospectively externally validated. The PCS framework offers a potential strategy to increase the chance of a successful (costly) prospective validation.

Validation of a clinical decision instrument for emergent neuroimaging after a seizure: Let's image malignancy, intracranial hemorrhage, and trauma (LIMIT).

Given the many causes of seizures, emergency physicians often utilize brain computed tomography (CT) to evaluate for intracranial pathology. However, a CT exposes patients to 100 times more radiation than a chest radiograph. Previously, we developed a four-item clinical decision instrument (CDI) to determine which patients with status epilepticus (SE) do not require emergent neuroimaging. In this study, we seek to prospectively validate our CDI in patients with a history of seizures with both SE and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. This was a prospective observational study of 1,739 consecutive patients who were recruited from two urban hospitals in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. All patients, 18years and older, who presented with a chief complaint of seizure and had emergency neuroimaging performed were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded from analysis if this was a first-time seizure, had a ventriculoperitoneal shunt, or had focal neurologic deficits. A total of 376 patients were in the final analysis. Of the 376 patients, 10 patients (3%) had positive CTs. Nine of the 10 of the patients were identified by our CDI, resulting in a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.5%. On secondary analysis, we refined our CDI from four to three criteria: 1) history of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), 2) active malignancy, and 3) trauma. These criteria also had a NPV of >99% when applied to patients in SE. The validation of our CDI showed improved NPV when compared to the derivation set. Use of the criteria of history of ICH, active malignancy, and trauma could have reduced the use of emergent neuroimaging in our cohort by up to 49%. This CDI should be validated in a larger subset of patients and in multiple centers prior to widespread adoption.

Predicting orbital fractures in head injury: a preliminary study of clinical findings

PurposePatients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) following head injury often undergo computed tomography (CT) of the head to exclude traumatic brain injury. In many cases, this does not show the maxillofacial skeleton. A proportion of these patients also sustain facial fractures, and when fractures involve the orbits, CT imaging is useful in diagnosis and management; obtaining a second scan may cause delay, incur greater cost, and increase radiation dose. The aim of this preliminary study was to examine the value of signs and symptoms of orbital fractures in predicting a fracture on CT.MethodsThe clinical records of 47 patients who underwent CT of the face following facial trauma were retrospectively examined for the presence of signs and symptoms of orbital fractures. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) were then calculated for each sign and symptom for the presence of an orbital fracture on CT. We also described a clinical decision instrument and examined the predictive values of this.ResultsChange in the position of the globe, reduced visual acuity, subconjunctival haemorrhage and change in sensation in the maxillary division of the trigeminal nerve were the most specific signs and symptoms for orbital fracture. Our clinical decision instrument had 80.0% sensitivity, 75.0% specificity, 90.3% PPV and 56.3% NPV for predicting the presence of an orbital fracture on CT in this population.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that signs and symptoms of orbital fractures may be useful for predicting these injuries, and a decision instrument could be used in the ED to identify patients likely to benefit from extending the radiation field to include the orbits where CT of the head is already planned. This work is however exploratory; and further prospective validation is required before a robust instrument can be recommended for clinical use.

Derivation of a clinical decision instrument to identify patients with status epilepticus who require emergent brain CT

BackgroundStudies have shown the value of CT brain imaging in adults with first-time seizures, but there are no recommendations regarding emergent brain CTs in persons with an established seizure disorders. Our study aimed to derive a clinical decision instrument (CDI) to determine which patients with status epilepticus (SE) require emergent brain imaging. MethodsThis was a retrospective chart review of patients who presented to our emergency department with SE between 2010 and 2018. Patients with first-time seizures were excluded. A priori, we defined high risk criteria for emergent imaging as well as positive findings on brain CT. High risk criteria included known malignancy, trauma, and immunosuppression. Positive CT scans included findings such as intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and mass. ResultsWe identified 214 patients who met inclusion criteria Of the 181 patients without high risk criteria, 3% had positive CT scans. Of the 33 patients with high risk criteria, 10% had positive CT scans. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for our initial CDI were 38%, 85%, 9%, and 97%. Adding the criterion of prior ICH would have lowered our miss rate to 0.6%. Modifying our CDI to 1) History of ICH, 2) Malignancy, 3) Immunosuppression, and 4) Trauma would result in a CDI with sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 87.5%, 87.4%, 21.2%, and 99.5%. ConclusionsBy using four criteria to identify high risk patients, we can defer CT scanning in the vast majority of patients with SE and known seizure disorders. This CDI should be prospectively validated before adoption.

ED Chest Pain Rules: Follow Your HEART?

ED Chest Pain Rules: Follow Your HEART?

Prognostic Accuracy of the HEART Score for Prediction of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients Presenting With Chest Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The HEART score has been proposed for emergency department (ED) prediction of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). We sought to summarize all studies assessing the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score for prediction of MACE in adult ED patients presenting with chest pain. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception through May 2018 and included studies using the HEART score for the prediction of short-term MACE in adult patients presenting to the ED with chest pain. The main outcome was short-term (i.e., 30-day or 6-week) incidence of MACE. We secondarily evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the HEART score for prediction of mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). Where available, accuracy of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) score was determined. We included 30 studies (n = 44,202) in analysis. A HEART score above the low-risk threshold (≥4) had a sensitivity of 95.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]= 93.3%-97.5%) and specificity of 44.6% (95% CI= 38.8%-50.5%) for MACE. A high-risk HEART score (≥7) had a sensitivity of 39.5% (95% CI= 31.6%-48.1%) and specificity of 95.0% (95% CI= 92.6%-96.6%) for MACE, whereas a TIMI score above the low-risk threshold (≥2) had a sensitivity of 87.8% (95% CI= 80.2%-92.8%) and specificity of 48.1% (95% CI= 38.9%-57.5%) for MACE. A high-risk TIMI score (≥6) was 2.8% sensitive (95% CI= 0.8%-9.6%), but 99.6% (95% CI= 98.5%-99.9%) specific for MACE. A HEART score ≥ 4 had a sensitivity of 95.0% (95% CI= 87.2%-98.2%) for prediction of mortality and 97.5% (95% CI= 93.7%-99.0%) for prediction of MI. The HEART score has excellent performance for prediction of MACE (particularly mortality and MI) in chest pain patients and should be the primary clinical decision instrument used for the risk stratification of this patient population.

A clinical decision instrument to predict 30-day death and cardiovascular hospitalizations after an emergency department visit for atrial fibrillation: The Atrial Fibrillation in the Emergency Room, Part 2 (AFTER2) study

BackgroundIn previous work, we derived and validated a tool that predicts 30-day mortality in emergency department atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a tool that predicts a composite of 30-day mortality and return cardiovascular hospitalizations. MethodsThis retrospective cohort study at 24 emergency departments in Ontario, Canada, included patients with a primary diagnosis of AF who were seen between April 2008 and March 2009. We assessed a composite outcome of 30-day mortality and subsequent hospitalizations for a cardiovascular reason, including stroke. ResultsOf 3,510 patients, 2,343 were randomly selected for the derivation cohort, leaving 1,167 in the validation cohort. The composite outcome occurred in 227 (9.7%) and 125 (10.7%) patients in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. Eleven variables were independently associated with the outcome: older age, not taking anticoagulation, HAS-BLED score of ≥3, 3 laboratory results (positive troponin, supratherapeutic international normalized ratio, and elevated creatinine), emergency department administration of furosemide, and 4 patient comorbidities (heart failure, chronic obstructive lung disease, cancer, dementia). In the validation cohort, the observed 30-day outcomes in the 5 risk strata that were defined using the derivation cohort were 2.0%, 6.6%, 10.7%, 12.5%, and 20.0%. The c statistic was 0.73 and 0.69 in the derivation and validation cohort, respectively. ConclusionsUsing a population-based sample, we derived and validated a tool that predicts the risk of early death and rehospitalization for a cardiovascular reason in emergency department AF patients. The tool can offer information to managing physicians about the risk of death and rehospitalization for AF patients seen in the in emergency department, as well as identify patient groups for future targeted interventions aimed at preventing these outcomes.

372 Derivation of a Clinical Decision Instrument to Identify Adults in a Community Setting With Mild Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage at Low Risk for Requiring Critical Care Intervention

Adults presenting to the ED with mild traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (tICH) are commonly admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), although critical care interventions are often unnecessary. In prior research, we found that a clinical decision instrument (CDI) derived at an academic Level I trauma center to identify adults at low risk for critical care interventions performed poorly in a community setting, likely because of substantial differences in patient case-mix. We sought to derive a more generalizable CDI among patients of a large community-based integrated health care delivery system. This retrospective cohort study included non-anticoagulated adults (≥18 years of age) with mild tICH, defined as GCS score ≥13, across 21 community EDs from 01/2012 to 12/2013. No study facility carried a Level I trauma center designation, and only one carried a Level II designation. The primary outcome of at least one critical care intervention within 48 hours of ED arrival included intubation, neurosurgical intervention, vasopressor or inotrope use, invasive monitoring, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Using logistic regression with single independent variables, we identified potential predictors of the outcome, developed a 6-variable predictive logistic regression model, and created a simplified CDI to identify low-risk patients based on predicted probabilities from the model. We examined the prevalence of patients designated low-risk by both CDIs and compared performance metrics. We calculated sensitivity and specificity with Clopper-Pearson, positive and negative predictive values with standard logit, and c-statistics with Wald confidence interval (CI) estimates. Our cohort included 929 patients with mean age of 73.3 (SD 17.0) years; 50% were female, and 82% were injured by a ground-level fall. Of these, 110 (11.8%) received at least one critical care intervention, 100 of whom received a neurosurgical operation, mannitol or hypertonic saline. Patients identified as low risk had none of the following: time from trauma to ED >7 days, ED admitting GCS <15, lowest ED systolic blood pressure >140 mmHg, CT evidence of skull fracture, mass effect, or midline shift >5 mm. The new CDI designated nearly three times as many patients as low-risk than the academic-based CDI with similar sensitivity and significantly higher specificity (see Table). We derived a CDI to identify patients with mild tICH at low risk for requiring ICU-level care in this community setting. The community-based instrument was equally sensitive as its academic counterpart, but outperformed it with a greater specificity and positive predictive value. This lower rate of false positives may increase its ultimate clinical utility. Continued model development may further improve specificity, and a prospective validation study will be needed prior to clinical implementation.

Structured Clinical Decision Aids Are Seldom Compared With Subjective Physician Judgment, and Are Seldom Superior

We determine how often studies that evaluate the performance of an aid for decisionmaking, be it a simple laboratory or imaging test or a complex multielement decision instrument, compare the aid's performance to independent, unaided physician judgment. This was a cross-sectional survey of all Original Research and Brief Research Report articles in Annals of EmergencyMedicine from 1998 to 2015. We included all articles that evaluated the performance of an aid for decisionmaking in assisting a physician with a decision about testing, treatment, diagnosis, or disposition. Two authors independently characterized the intent and purpose of each aid for decisionmaking, determined whether each study had a comparison to unaided physician judgment within the article or in a separate article, and recorded the result of that comparison. One hundred seventy-one (8.3%) of 2,060 research articles studied the performance characteristics of an aid for decisionmaking, 48 of which were formal clinical decision instruments. Forty of the 171 studies retrospectively analyzed existing databases and therefore could not assess physician judgment. Investigators compared the aid for decisionmaking to physician judgment in 11% (15/131) of the prospective studies, including 15% (6/41) of studies that evaluated a formal clinical decision instrument. For 9 articles that had no comparison to physician judgment, we found 6 unique external publications that compared that aid to physician clinical judgment. The decision aid was superior to clinical judgment in 2 of the 21 studies that contained a comparison. Physician judgment is infrequently assessed when the performance of an aid for decisionmaking is evaluated, and, when reported, the decision aid seldom outperformed physician judgment.

Pediatric Minor Traumatic Brain Injury With Intracranial Hemorrhage: Identifying Low-Risk Patients Who May Not Benefit From ICU Admission.

Pediatric patients with any severity of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (tICH) are often admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for early detection of secondary injury. We hypothesize that there is a subset of these patients with mild injury and tICH for whom ICU care is unnecessary. To quantify tICH frequency and describe disposition and to identify patients at low risk of inpatient critical care intervention (CCI). We retrospectively reviewed patients aged 0 to 17 years with tICH at a single level I trauma center from 2008 to 2013. The CCI included mechanical ventilation, invasive monitoring, blood product transfusion, hyperosmolar therapy, and neurosurgery. Binary recursive partitioning analysis led to a clinical decision instrument classifying patients as low risk for CCI. Of 296 tICH admissions without prior CCI in the field or emergency department, 29 had an inpatient CCI. The decision instrument classified patients as low risk for CCI when patients had absence of the following: midline shift, depressed skull fracture, unwitnessed/unknown mechanism, and other nonextremity injuries. This clinical decision instrument produced a high likelihood of excluding patients with CCI (sensitivity, 96.6%; 95% confidence interval, 82.2%-99.9%) from the low-risk group, with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.056 (95% confidence interval, -0.053-0.166). The decision instrument misclassified 1 patient with CCI into the low-risk group, but would have impacted disposition of 164 pediatric ICU admissions through 5 years (55% of the sample). A subset of low-risk patients may not require ICU admission. The proposed decision rule identified low-risk children with tICH who may be observable outside an ICU, although this rule requires external validation before implementation.

National survey of family physicians to define functional decline in elderly patients with minor trauma.

BackgroundFailing to assess elderly patients for functional decline at the time around a minor injury may result in adverse health outcomes. This study was conducted to define what constitutes clinically significant functional decline and the sensitivity required for a clinical decision instrument to identify such functional decline after an injury in previously independent elderly patients.MethodsAfter a thorough development process, a survey questionnaire was administered to a random sample of 178 family physicians. The surveys were distributed using a modified Dillman technique.ResultsFrom 143 eligible surveys, we received 67 completed surveys (response rate, 46.9 %). Respondents indicated that a drop of at least 3 points on the 28-point Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) ADL Scale was considered clinically significant by 90 % of physicians. Ninety percent (90 %) of physicians would be satisfied with a sensitivity of 90 % or more for a clinical decision instrument to detect patients at risk of functional decline at 6 months following an injury. The majority of family physicians do not routinely assess the majority of the tasks on the OARS scale for injured elderly patients.ConclusionsA high proportion of physicians (90 %) would consider a drop of 3 points on the OARS ADL Scale as significant to define functional decline and would be satisfied with a sensitivity of 90 % for a clinical decision instrument to detect such a decline. Any instrument to identify patients at elevated risk for subsequent decline should consider these outcome measures to be clinically useful.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0520-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Clinical Decision Instrument for 30-Day Death After an Emergency Department Visit for Atrial Fibrillation: The Atrial Fibrillation in the Emergency Room (AFTER) Study

The high volume of patients treated in an emergency department (ED) for atrial fibrillation is predicted to increase significantly in the next few decades. Currently, 11% of these patients die within a year. We sought to derive and validate a complex model and a simplified model that predicts mortality in ED patients with atrial fibrillation. This population-based, retrospective cohort study included 3,510 adult patients with a primary diagnosis of atrial fibrillation who were treated at 24 hospital EDs in Ontario, Canada, between April 2008 and March 2009. The main outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. In the derivation cohort (n=2,343; mean age 68.8 years), 2.6% of patients died within 30 days of the ED visit versus 2.7% in the validation cohort (n=1,167; mean age 68.3 years). Variables associated with mortality in the complex model included age, presenting pulse rate and systolic blood pressure, presence of chest pain, 2 laboratory results (positive troponin result and creatinine level greater than 200 μmol [2.26 mg/dL]), 4 comorbidities (smoking, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and dementia), an increased bleeding risk, and a second acute ED diagnosis (in addition to atrial fibrillation). Observed 30-day mortality in the 5 risk strata that were defined by the predicted probability of death were 0.44%, 0.41%, 0.23%, 1.61%, and 10.3%. The c statistics were 0.88 and 0.87 in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The a priori-selected 6-variable model, TrOPs-BAC, included a positive Troponin result, Other acute ED diagnosis, Pulmonary disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), Bleeding risk, Aged 75 years or older, and Congestive heart failure. The c statistic for the simplified model was 0.81 in both the derivation and validation cohorts. Using a population-based sample, we derived and validated both a complex and a simplified instrument that predicts mortality after an emergency visit for atrial fibrillation. These may aid clinicians in identifying high-risk patients for hospitalization while safely discharging more patients home.

A conceptual model of emergency physician decision making for head computed tomography in mild head injury

The use of computed tomographic scanning in blunt head trauma has increased dramatically in recent years without an accompanying rise in the prevalence of injury or hospital admission for serious conditions. Because computed tomography is neither harmless nor inexpensive, researchers have attempted to optimize utilization, largely through research that describes which clinical variables predict intracranial injury, and use this information to develop clinical decision instruments. Although such techniques may be useful when the benefits and harms of each strategy (neuroimaging vs observation) are quantifiable and amenable to comparison, the exact magnitude of these benefits and harms remains unknown in this clinical scenario. We believe that most clinical decision instrument development efforts are misguided insofar as they ignore critical, nonclinical factors influencing the decision to image. In this article, we propose a conceptual model to illustrate how clinical and nonclinical factors influence emergency physicians making this decision. We posit that elements unrelated to standard clinical factors, such as personality of the physician, fear of litigation and of missed diagnoses, patient expectations, and compensation method, may have equal or greater impact on actual decision making than traditional clinical factors. We believe that 3 particular factors deserve special consideration for further research: fear of error/malpractice, financial incentives, and patient engagement. Acknowledgement and study of these factors will be essential if we are to understand how emergency physicians truly make these decisions and how test-ordering behavior can be modified.

Construct Validation of an Interactive Digital Algorithm for Ostomy Care

The purpose of this study was to evaluate construct validity for a previously face and content validated Ostomy Algorithm using digital real-life clinical scenarios. A cross-sectional, mixed-methods Web-based survey design study was conducted. Two hundred ninety-seven English-speaking RNs completed the study; participants practiced in both acute care and postacute settings, with 1 expert ostomy nurse (WOC nurse) and 2 nonexpert nurses. Following written consent, respondents answered demographic questions and completed a brief algorithm tutorial. Participants were then presented with 7 ostomy-related digital scenarios consisting of real-life photos and pertinent clinical information. Respondents used the 11 assessment components of the digital algorithm to choose management options. Participant written comments about the scenarios and the research process were collected. The mean overall percentage of correct responses was 84.23%. Mean percentage of correct responses for respondents with a self-reported basic ostomy knowledge was 87.7%; for those with a self-reported intermediate ostomy knowledge was 85.88% and those who were self-reported experts in ostomy care achieved 82.77% correct response rate. Five respondents reported having no prior ostomy care knowledge at screening and achieved an overall 45.71% correct response rate. No negative comments regarding the algorithm were recorded by participants. The new standardized Ostomy Algorithm remains the only face, content, and construct validated digital clinical decision instrument currently available. Further research on application at the bedside while tracking patient outcomes is warranted.

Derivation of a Clinical Decision Instrument to Identify Adult Patients With Mild Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage at Low Risk for Requiring ICU Admission

The objective of this study is to derive a clinical decision instrument with a sensitivity of at least 95% (with upper and lower bounds of the 95% confidence intervals [CIs] within a 5% range) to identify adult emergency department patients with mild traumatic intracranial hemorrhage who are at low risk for requiring critical care resources during hospitalization and thus may not need admission to the ICU. This was a prospective, observational study of adult patients with mild traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (initial Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score 13 to 15, with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage) presenting to a Level I trauma center from July 2009 to February 2013. The need for ICU admission was defined as the presence of an acute critical care intervention (intubation, neurosurgical intervention, blood product transfusion, vasopressor or inotrope administration, invasive monitoring for hemodynamic instability, urgent treatment for arrhythmia or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and therapeutic angiography). We derived the clinical decision instrument with binary recursive partitioning (with a misclassification cost of 20 to 1). The accuracy of the decision instrument was compared with the treating physician's (emergency medicine faculty) clinical impression. A total of 600 patients with mild traumatic intracranial hemorrhage were enrolled; 116 patients (19%) had a critical care intervention. The derived instrument consisted of 4 predictor variables: admission GCS score less than 15, nonisolated head injury, aged 65 years or older, and evidence of swelling or shift on initial cranial computed tomography scan. The decision instrument identified 114 of 116 patients requiring an acute critical care intervention (sensitivity 98.3%; 95% CI 93.9% to 99.5%) if at least 1 variable was present and 192 of 484 patients who did not have an acute critical care intervention (specificity 39.7%; 95% CI 35.4% to 44.1%) if no variables were present. Physician clinical impression was slightly less sensitive (90.1%; 95% CI 83.1% to 94.4%) but overall similar to the clinical decision instrument. We derived a clinical decision instrument that identifies a subset of patients with mild traumatic intracranial hemorrhage who are at low risk for acute critical care intervention and thus may not require ICU admission. Physician clinical impression had test characteristics similar to those of the decision instrument. Because the resultsare based on single-center data without a validation cohort, external validation is required.