Dataset Information

Preliminary development of a clinical decision rule for acute aortic syndromes.

ABSTRACT: Patients with suspected acute aortic syndromes (AAS) often undergo computed tomography (CT) with negative results. We sought clinical and diagnostic criteria to identify low-risk patients, an initial step in developing a clinical decision rule.We retrospectively identified all adults presenting to our emergency department (ED) from January 1, 2006, to August 1, 2010, who underwent CT angiography for suspected AAS without prior trauma or AAS. A total of 1465 patients met inclusion criteria; a retrospective case-controlled review (ratio 1:4) was conducted. Cases were diagnosed with aortic dissection, intramural hematoma, penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer, or ruptured aneurysm.Of the patients who underwent CT, 2.7% (40/1465) had an AAS; 2 additional cases were diagnosed after admission (ED miss rate, 5% [2/42]). Patients with AAS were significantly older than controls (66 vs 59 years; P = .008). Risk factors included abnormal chest radiograph (sensitivity, 79% [26/33]; specificity, 82% [113/137]) and acute chest pain (sensitivity, 83% [29/35]; specificity, 71% [111/157]). None of the 19 patients with resolved pain upon ED presentation had AAS. These data support a 2-step rule: first screen for ongoing pain; if present, screen for acute chest pain or an abnormal chest radiograph. This approach achieves a 54% (84/155) reduction in CT usage with a sensitivity for AAS of 96% (95% confidence interval, 89%-100%), negative predictive value of 99.8% (99.4%-100%), and a false-negative rate of 1.7% (1/84).Our results demonstrate a need to safely identify patients at low risk for AAS who can forgo CT. We developed a preliminary 2-step clinical decision rule, which requires validation.

SUBMITTER: Lovy AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4275798 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Preliminary development of a clinical decision rule for acute aortic syndromes.

Lovy Andrew J AJ Bellin Eran E Levsky Jeffrey M JM Esses David D Haramati Linda B LB

The American journal of emergency medicine 20130920 11

<h4>Objective</h4>Patients with suspected acute aortic syndromes (AAS) often undergo computed tomography (CT) with negative results. We sought clinical and diagnostic criteria to identify low-risk patients, an initial step in developing a clinical decision rule.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively identified all adults presenting to our emergency department (ED) from January 1, 2006, to August 1, 2010, who underwent CT angiography for suspected AAS without prior trauma or AAS. A total of 1465 pati ...[more]

PMID: 24055476

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePenicillin allergy is a significant public health issue for patients, antimicrobial stewardship programs, and health services. Validated clinical decision rules are urgently needed to identify low-risk penicillin allergies that potentially do not require penicillin skin testing by a specialist.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a penicillin allergy clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment of patient-reported penicillin allergies.Design, setting, and participantsIn this diagnostic study, a multicenter prospective antibiotic allergy-tested cohort of 622 patients from 2 tertiary care sites in Melbourne, Australia (Austin Health and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre) was used for derivation and internal validation of a penicillin allergy decision rule. Backward stepwise logistic regression was used to derive the model, including clinical variables predictive of a positive penicillin allergy test result. Internal validation of the final model used bootstrapped samples and the model scoring derived from the coefficients. External validation was performed in retrospective penicillin allergy-tested cohorts consisting of 945 patients from Sydney and Perth, Australia, and Nashville, Tennessee. Patients who reported a penicillin allergy underwent penicillin allergy testing using skin prick, intradermal, or patch testing and/or oral challenge (direct or after skin testing). Data were collected from June 26, 2008, to June 3, 2019, and analyzed from January 9 to 12, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome for the model was any positive result of penicillin allergy testing performed during outpatient or inpatient assessment.ResultsFrom an internal derivation and validation cohort of 622 patients (367 female [59.0%]; median age, 60 [interquartile range{IQR}, 48-71] years) and an external validation cohort of 945 patients (662 female [70.1%]; median age, 55 [IQR, 38-68] years), the 4 features associated with a positive penicillin allergy test result on multivariable analysis were summarized in the mnemonic PEN-FAST: penicillin allergy, five or fewer years ago, anaphylaxis/angioedema, severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR), and treatment required for allergy episode. The major criteria included an allergy event occurring 5 or fewer years ago (2 points) and anaphylaxis/angioedema or SCAR (2 points); the minor criterion (1 point), treatment required for an allergy episode. Internal validation showed minimal mean optimism of 0.003 with internally validated area under the curve of 0.805. A cutoff of less than 3 points for PEN-FAST was chosen to classify a low risk of penicillin allergy, for which only 17 of 460 patients (3.7%) had positive results of allergy testing, with a negative predictive value of 96.3% (95% CI, 94.1%-97.8%). External validation resulted in similar findings.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, PEN-FAST was found to be a simple rule that accurately identified low-risk penicillin allergies that do not require formal allergy testing. The results suggest that a PEN-FAST score of less than 3, associated with a high negative predictive value, could be used by clinicians and antimicrobial stewardship programs to identify low-risk penicillin allergies at the point of care.

Project description:ObjectivesIn preparation for development of a clinical decision rule (CDR) to promote more efficient use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosing orbital fractures, the authors sought to estimate the annual incidence of orbital fractures in emergency departments (EDs) and the usage of CT to make these diagnoses. The authors also sought to evaluate a mandatory electronic data collection instrument (EDCI) administered to providers to facilitate CDR data collection.MethodsNational estimates were made by analyzing the 2007 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) database, while hospital billing system and coding data were used to make local estimates. An EDCI was integrated into the CT ordering system such that providers had to complete the form to perform a CT. Because the EDCI had to be filled out for every CT ordered, data collection efficiency was measured by compliance (counting the number of unrealistic data collection instrument answers) and by timing a convenience sample of providers completing the EDCI.ResultsOut of 116.8 million ED visits in the United States in 2007, 4.1 million patients were treated for injuries of the eye and face. Of those, 820,252 patients underwent CT imaging, with 102,999 patients (12.5%) diagnosed with an orbital fracture. In our local hospital system with 122,500 annual ED visits, 752 CTs of orbits were performed, with 172 (23%) orbital fractures. The EDCI compliance rate was 94.9% and took less than 5 minutes to complete.ConclusionsNational and local data demonstrate a low yield for CT imaging in identifying orbital fractures. Data collection using a mandatory EDCI linked to computerized provider order entry can provide prospective, consecutive patient data that are needed to develop a CDR for the selective use of CT imaging in orbital trauma. Such a decision rule could increase the efficiency in diagnosing orbital fractures, thereby improving patient care, reducing radiation exposure, and decreasing costs.

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this study was to develop and validate an easy to use clinical decision rule, applicable in the ED that limits the number of unnecessary cast immobilizations and diagnostic follow-up in suspected scaphoid injury, without increasing the risk of missing fractures.MethodsA prospective multicenter study was conducted that consisted of three components: (1) derivation of a clinical prediction model for detecting scaphoid fractures in adult patients following wrist trauma; (2) internal validation of the model; (3) design of a clinical decision rule. The predictors used were: sex, age, swelling of the anatomic snuffbox, tenderness in the anatomic snuffbox, scaphoid tubercle tenderness, painful ulnar deviation and painful axial thumb compression. The outcome measure was the presence of a scaphoid fracture, diagnosed on either initial radiographs or during re-evaluation after 1-2 weeks or on additional imaging (radiographs/MRI/CT). After multivariate logistic regression analysis and bootstrapping, the regression coefficient for each significant predictor was calculated. The effect of the rule was determined by calculating the number of missed scaphoid fractures and reduction of suspected fractures that required a cast.ResultsA consecutive series of 893 patients with acute wrist injury was included. Sixty-eight patients (7.6%) were diagnosed with a scaphoid fracture. The final prediction rule incorporated sex, swelling of the anatomic snuffbox, tenderness in the anatomic snuffbox, painful ulnar deviation and painful axial thumb compression. Internal validation of the prediction rule showed a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 20%. Using this rule, a 15% reduction in unnecessary immobilization and imaging could be achieved with a 50% decreased risk of missing a fracture compared with current clinical practice.ConclusionsThis dataset provided a simple clinical decision rule for scaphoid fractures following acute wrist injury that limits unnecessary immobilization and imaging with a decreased risk of missing a fracture compared to current clinical practice.Clinical prediction rule1/(1 + EXP (-(0.649662618 × if man) + (0.51353467826 × if swelling anatomic snuffbox) + (-0.79038263985 × if painful palpation anatomic snuffbox) + (0.57681198857 × if painful ulnar deviation) + (0.66499549728 × if painful thumb compression)-1.685).Trial registrationTrial register NTR 2544, www.trialregister.nl.

Dataset Information

Preliminary development of a clinical decision rule for acute aortic syndromes.

Publications

Preliminary development of a clinical decision rule for acute aortic syndromes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets