Outcomes Considered Most Important by Emergency Physicians When Determining Disposition of Patients with Pulmonary Embolism

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Outcomes Considered Most Important by Emergency Physicians When Determining Disposition of Patients with Pulmonary Embolism

Citable link to this page

. . . . . .

Title: Outcomes Considered Most Important by Emergency Physicians When Determining Disposition of Patients with Pulmonary Embolism
Author: Sacco, Weston; Hariharan, Praveen; Kabrhel, Christopher; Liu, Shan Woo

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Kabrhel, Christopher, Weston Sacco, Shan Liu, and Praveen Hariharan. 2010. Outcomes considered most important by emergency physicians when determining disposition of patients with pulmonary embolism. International Journal of Emergency Medicine 3(4): 239-264.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Purpose: Clinical decision rules for the disposition of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) are typically validated against an outcome of 30-day mortality or disease recurrence. There is little justification for this time frame, nor is it clear whether this outcome reflects emergency department (ED) decision making. Aims: To determine which outcomes emergency physicians (EP) consider most relevant to disposition decisions. Methods: Survey of attending EPs in geographically diverse US states using acute PE as the diagnostic framework. Responses required single-answer multiple choice, a numerical percentage, rank-ordered responses, or a five-point Likert scale. We distributed the survey via e-mail to 608 EPs. Results: We received responses from 292 (48%) EPs: 88% board certified, 91% trained in emergency medicine, and 70% work in academics. Respondents reported discharging 1% of patients with PE from the ED, but 21% reported being asked to do so by an admitting service. EPs were more interested in knowing 5-day (in hospital) outcomes [192/265, 72% (95% exact CI=66%–78%)] than 30-day outcomes [39/261, 15% (95% exact CI=11%–20%)] or 90-day outcomes [29/263, 11% (95% exact CI=8%–15%)]. On a Likert scale, 212/241 (88%, 95% exact CI=83%–92%) agreed or strongly agreed that they considered 5-day (in hospital) clinical deterioration when making a decision to admit or discharge a patient from the ED compared to 184/242 (76%, 95% exact CI=70%–81%) and 73/242 (30%, 95% exact CI=24%–36%) for 30 and 90 days, respectively. A wide variety of clinical outcomes beyond death or recurrent PE were considered indicative of clinical deterioration. Conclusions: Five-day (in hospital) outcomes that incorporate a variety of clinical deterioration events are of interest to EPs when determining the disposition of ED patients with PE. Researchers should consider this when developing and validating clinical decision rules.
Published Version: doi:10.1007/s12245-010-0206-8
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3047862/pdf/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:5146969

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters