Search

Background: Red cell distribution width (RDW), an index for variation of red blood cell (RBC) size, has been proposed as a potential marker for poorer outcomes in several aging-related diseases and conditions. We tested whether greater variability of RBC size, presented as a higher RDW value, predicts poor prognoses among hospitalized patients over 60 years old., Methods: We retrospectively collected data from older hospitalized patients aged ≥60 years between January 2013 to December 2017 at Sutter Health, a large integrated health system in Northern California. The RDW was measured during hospital admission and categorized with 1% intervals (≤13.9, 14.0-14.9, 15.0-15.9, 16.0-16.9, 17.0-17.9 and ≥18.0%). The primary outcome was the rate of in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes included 30-day re-admission rate and length of hospital stay (in days)., Results: A total of 167,292 admissions from 94,617 patients were included. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 6.3%. As the RDW value increased, the rate of in-hospital mortality gradually increased from 2.7% for the lowest RDW category to 12.2% in the highest category (p-trend <0.001). The overall 30-day re-admission rate after discharge was 12.5% and the rate of 30-day re-admission also increased with increasing RDW categories (7.4% in the lowest group vs. 15.8% in the highest group, p-trend <0.001). Patients with the highest RDW values at admission stayed 1.5-2.0 times longer in the hospital than patients with lower RDW values who were admitted for the same causes., Conclusions: Greater variability of RBC size is significantly associated with worse prognosis in hospitalized elderly patients, indicating higher mortality, greater risk of early re-admission, and longer hospital stay days. Risk stratification strategies for hospitalized elderly should include RDW value., (© 2022 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: US hospitals have reported compliance with the SEP-1 quality measure to Medicare since 2015. Finding an association between compliance and outcomes is essential to gauge measure effectiveness., Research Question: What is the association between compliance with SEP-1 and 30-day mortality among Medicare beneficiaries?, Study Design and Methods: Studying patient-level data reported to Medicare by 3,241 hospitals from October 1, 2015, to March 31, 2017, we used propensity score matching and a hierarchical general linear model (HGLM) to estimate the treatment effects associated with compliance with SEP-1. Compliance was defined as completion of all qualifying SEP-1 elements including lactate measurements, blood culture collection, broad-spectrum antibiotic administration, 30 mL/kg crystalloid fluid administration, application of vasopressors, and patient reassessment. The primary outcome was a change in 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in length of stay., Results: We completed two matches to evaluate population-level treatment effects. In standard match, 122,870 patients whose care was compliant were matched with the same number whose care was noncompliant. Compliance was associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality (21.81% vs 27.48%, respectively), yielding an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 5.67% (95% CI, 5.33-6.00; P < .001). In stringent match, 107,016 patients whose care was compliant were matched with the same number whose care was noncompliant. Compliance was associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality (22.22% vs 26.28%, respectively), yielding an ARR of 4.06% (95% CI, 3.70-4.41; P < .001). At the subject level, our HGLM found compliance associated with lower 30-day risk-adjusted mortality (adjusted conditional OR, 0.829; 95% CI, 0.812-0.846; P < .001). Multiple elements correlated with lower mortality. Median length of stay was shorter among cases whose care was compliant (5 vs 6 days; interquartile range, 3-9 vs 4-10, respectively; P < .001)., Interpretation: Compliance with SEP-1 was associated with lower 30-day mortality. Rendering SEP-1 compliant care may reduce the incidence of avoidable deaths., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. All rights reserved.)