Search

Objective: Experts recommended that direct discharge without hospitalization (DDWH) for emergency departments (EDs) able to observe acute heart failure (AHF) patients should be >40%, and these discharged patients should fulfil the following outcome standards: 30-day all-cause mortality <2% (outcome A); 7-day ED revisit due to AHF < 10% (outcome B); and 30-day ED revisit/hospitalization due to AHF < 20% (outcome C). We investigated these outcomes in a nationwide cohort and their relationship with the ED DDWH percentage., Methods: We analyzed the EAHFE registry (includes about 15% of Spanish EDs), calculated DDWH percentage of each ED, and A/B/C outcomes of DDWH patients, overall and in each individual ED. Relationship between ED DDWH and outcomes was assessed by linear and quadratic regression models, non-weighted and weighted by DDWH patients provided by each ED., Results: Among 17,420 patients, 4488 had DDWH (25.8%, median ED stay = 0 days, IQR = 0-1). Only 12.9% EDs achieved DDWH > 40%. Considering DDWH patients altogether, outcomes A/C were above the recommended standards (4.3%/29.4%), while outcome B was nearly met (B = 10.1%). When analyzing individual EDs, 58.1% of them achieved the outcome B standard, while outcomes A/C standards were barely achieved (19.3%/9.7%). We observed clinically relevant linear/quadratic relationships between higher DDWH and worse outcomes B (weighted R 2  = 0.184/0.322) and C (weighted R 2  = 0.430/0.624), but not with outcome A (weighted R 2  = 0.002/0.022)., Conclusions: The EDs of this nationwide cohort do not fulfil the standards for AHF patients with DDWH. High DDWH rates negatively impact ED revisit or hospitalization but not mortality. This may represent an opportunity for improvement in better selecting patients for early ED discharge and in ensuring early follow-up after ED discharge., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs) in Spain, and to assess associations between characteristics and outcomes., Material and Methods: Prospective, multicenter, nested-cohort study. Sixty-one EDs included a random sample of all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Demographic and baseline health information, including concomitant conditions; clinical characteristics related to the ED visit and complementary test results; and treatments were recorded throughout the episode in the ED. We calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for risk of in-hospital death and a composite outcome consisting of the following events: intensive care unit admission, orotracheal intubation or mechanical ventilation, or in-hospital death. The logistic regression models were constructed with 3 groups of independent variables: the demographic and baseline health characteristics, clinical characteristics and complementary test results related to the ED episode, and treatments., Results: The mean (SD) age of patients was 62 (18) years. Most had high- or low-grade fever, dry cough, dyspnea, and diarrhea. The most common concomitant conditions were cardiovascular diseases, followed by respiratory diseases and cancer. Baseline patient characteristics that showed a direct and independent association with worse outcome (death and the composite outcome) were age and obesity. Clinical variables directly associated with worse outcomes were impaired consciousness and pulmonary crackles; headache was inversely associated with worse outcomes. Complementary test findings that were directly associated with outcomes were bilateral lung infiltrates, lymphopenia, a high platelet count, a D-dimer concentration over 500 mg/dL, and a lactate-dehydrogenase concentration over 250 IU/L in blood., Conclusion: This profile of the clinical characteristics and comorbidity of patients with COVID-19 treated in EDs helps us predict outcomes and identify cases at risk of exacerbation. The information can facilitate preventive measures and improve outcomes.

Objective: To investigate the relationship between length of hospitalisation (LOH) and post-discharge outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) patients and to ascertain whether there are different patterns according to department of initial hospitalisation., Methods: Consecutive AHF patients hospitalised in 41 Spanish centres were grouped based on the LOH (<6/6-10/11-15/>15 days). Outcomes were defined as 90-day post-discharge all-cause mortality, AHF readmissions, and the combination of both. Hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted by chronic conditions and severity of decompensation, were calculated for groups with LOH >6 days vs. LOH <6 days (reference), and stratified by hospitalisation in cardiology, internal medicine, geriatrics, or short-stay units., Results: We included 8563 patients (mean age: 80 (SD = 10) years, 55.5% women), with a median LOH of 7 days (IQR 4-11): 2934 (34.3%) had a LOH <6 days, 3184 (37.2%) 6-10 days, 1287 (15.0%) 11-15 days, and 1158 (13.5%) >15 days. The 90-day post-discharge mortality was 11.4%, readmission 32.2%, and combined endpoint 37.4%. Mortality was increased by 36.5% (95%CI = 13.0-64.9) when LOH was 11-15 days, and by 72.0% (95%CI = 42.6-107.5) when >15 days. Conversely, no differences were found in readmission risk, and the combined endpoint only increased 21.6% (95%CI = 8.4-36.4) for LOH >15 days. Stratified analysis by hospitalisation departments rendered similar post-discharge outcomes, with all exhibiting increased mortality for LOH >15 days and no significant increments in readmission risk., Conclusions: Short hospitalisations are not associated with worse outcomes. While post-discharge readmissions are not affected by LOH, mortality risk increases as the LOH lengthens. These findings were similar across hospitalisation departments., (Copyright © 2019 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: The Multiple Estimation of Risk Based on the Emergency Department Spanish Score in Patients With Acute Heart Failure (MEESSI-AHF) is a validated clinical decision tool that characterizes risk of mortality in emergency department (ED) acute heart failure patients. The objective of this study is to compare the distribution of risk categories between hospitalized and discharged ED patients with acute heart failure., Methods: We included consecutive acute heart failure patients from 34 Spanish EDs. Patients were retrospectively classified according to MEESSI-AHF risk categories. We calculated the odds of hospitalization (versus direct discharge from the ED) across MEESSI-AHF risk categories. Next, we assessed the following 30-day postdischarge outcomes: ED revisit, hospitalization, death, and their combination. We used Cox hazards models to determine the adjusted association between ED disposition decision and the outcomes among patients who were stratified into low- and increased-risk categories., Results: We included 7,930 patients (80.5 years [SD 10.1 years]; women 54.7%; hospitalized 75.3%). Compared with that for low-risk MEESSI-AHF patients, odds ratios for hospitalization of patients in intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk categories were 1.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64 to 2.05), 3.05 (95% CI 2.48 to 3.76), and 3.98 (95% CI 3.13 to 5.05), respectively. However, almost half (47.6%) of all discharged patients were categorized as being at increased risk by MEESSI-AHF, and 19.0% of all the increased-risk patients were discharged from the ED. Among the low-risk MEESSI-AHF patients, the 30-day postdischarge mortality did not differ by ED disposition (hazard ratio [HR] for discharged patients with respect to hospitalized ones 0.65; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.11), nor did it differ in the increased-risk group (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.23). The discharged low-risk MEESSI-AHF patients had higher risks of 30-day ED revisit and hospitalization (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.57 to 2.20; and HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.40, respectively) compared with the admitted patients, as did the discharged patients in the increased-risk group (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.89; and HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.68, respectively), with similar results for the combined endpoint., Conclusion: The disposition decisions made in current clinical practice for ED acute heart failure patients calibrate with MEESSI-AHF risk categories, but nearly half of the patients currently discharged from the ED fall into increased-risk MEESSI-AHF categories., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)