Person:

Liu, Shan

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.