Dataset Information

Performance of seven different paediatric early warning scores to predict critical care admission in febrile children presenting to the emergency department: a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Paediatric Early Warning Scores (PEWS) are widely used in the UK, but the heterogeneity across tools and the limited data on their predictive performance represent obstacles to improving best practice. The standardisation of practice through the proposed National PEWS will rely on robust validation. Therefore, we compared the performance of the National PEWS with six other PEWS currently used in NHS hospitals, for their ability to predict critical care (CC) admission in febrile children attending the emergency department (ED).

Design

Retrospective single-centre cohort study.

Setting

Tertiary hospital paediatric ED.

Participants

A total of 11 449 eligible febrile ED attendances were identified from the electronic patient record over a 2-year period. Seven PEWS scores were calculated (Alder Hey, Bedside, Bristol, National, Newcastle and Scotland PEWS, and the Paediatric Observation Priority Score, using the worst observations recorded during their ED stay.

Outcomes

The primary outcome was CC admission within 48 hours, the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS) >48 hours and sepsis-related mortality.

Results

Of 11 449 febrile children, 134 (1.2%) were admitted to CC within 48 hours of ED presentation, 606 (5.3%) had a hospital LOS >48 hours. 10 (0.09%) children died, 5 (0.04%) were sepsis-related. All seven PEWS demonstrated excellent discrimination for CC admission (range area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) 0.91-0.95) and sepsis-related mortality (range AUC 0.95-0.99), most demonstrated moderate discrimination for hospital LOS (range AUC 0.69-0.75). In CC admission threshold analyses, bedside PEWS (AUC 0.90; 95% CI 0.86 to 0.93) and National PEWS (AUC 0.90; 0.87-0.93) were the most discriminative, both at a threshold of ≥6.

Conclusions

Our results support the use of the proposed National PEWS in the paediatric ED for the recognition of suspected sepsis to improve outcomes, but further validation is required in other settings and presentations.

SUBMITTER: Romaine ST

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8098996 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the factors that influence physicians' admission decisions, especially among lower acuity patients. For the purpose of our study, non-medical refers to all of the factors-other than the patient's clinical condition-that could potentially influence admission decisions.ObjectiveTo describe the influence of non-medical factors on physicians' decisions to admit non-critically ill patients presenting to the ED.DesignCross-sectional study of hospital admissions at a single academic medical center.ParticipantsNon-critically ill adult patients admitted to the hospital (n = 297) and the admitting emergency medicine physicians (n = 34).Main measuresA patient survey assessed non-medical factors, including primary care access and utilization. A physician survey assessed clinical and non-medical factors influencing the decision to admit. Based on physician responses, admissions were characterized as "strongly acuity-driven," "moderately acuity-driven," or "weakly acuity-driven." Among these admission types, we compared length of stay, cost, and readmission within 30 days to the hospital or ED.Key resultsBased on the admitting physician's assessment, we categorized the motivation for admission as strongly acuity-driven in 185 (62 %) admissions, moderately acuity-driven in 92 (31 %), and weakly acuity-driven in 20 (7 %). Per the physician surveys, 51 % of hospitalizations were strongly or moderately influenced by one or more non-medical factors, including lack of information about baseline conditions (23 %); inadequate access to outpatient specialty care (14 %); need for a diagnostic testing or procedure (12 %); a recent ED visit (11 %); and inadequate access to primary care (10 %). Compared with strongly-acuity driven admissions, admissions that were moderately or weakly acuity-driven were shorter and less costly but were associated with similar rates of ED (35 %) and hospital (27 %) readmission.ConclusionsNon-medical factors are influential in the admission decisions for many patients presenting to the emergency department. Moderately and weakly acuity-driven admissions may represent a feasible target for alternative care pathways.

Project description:ObjectivesTo devise an assessment tool to aid discharge and admission decision-making in relation to children and young people in hospital urgent and emergency care facilities, and thereby improve the quality of care that patients receive, using a clinical prediction modelling approach.DesignObservational cohort study with internal and external validation of a predictive tool.SettingTwo general emergency departments (EDs) and an urgent care centre in the North of England.ParticipantsThe eligibility criteria were children and young people 0-16 years of age who attended one of the three hospital sites within one National Health Service (NHS) organisation. Children were excluded if they opted out of the study, were brought to the ED following their death in the community or arrived in cardiac arrest when the heart rate and respiratory rate would be unmeasurable.Main outcome measuresAdmission or discharge. A participant was defined as being admitted to hospital if they left the ED to enter the hospital for further assessment, (including being admitted to an observation and assessment unit or hospital ward), either on first presentation or with the same complaint within 7 days. Those who were not admitted were defined as having been discharged.ResultsThe study collected data on 36 365 participants. 15 328 participants were included in the final analysis cohort (21 045 observations) and 17 710 participants were included in the validation cohort (23 262 observations). There were 14 variables entered into the regression analysis. Of the 13 that remained in the final model, 10 were present in all 500 bootstraps. The resulting Paediatric Admission Guidance in the Emergency Department (PAGE) score demonstrated good internal validity. The C-index (area under the ROC) was 0.779 (95% CI 0.772 to 0.786).ConclusionsFor units without the immediate availability of paediatricians the PAGE score can assist staff to determine risk of admission. Cut-off values will need to be adjusted to local circumstance.Study protocolThe study protocol has been published in an open access journal: Riaz et al Refining and testing the diagnostic accuracy of an assessment tool (Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust-Paediatric Observation Priority Score) to predict admission and discharge of children and young people who attend an ED: protocol for an observational study. BMC Pediatr 18, 303 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-018-1268-7.Trial registration numberThe protocol has been published and the study registered (NIHR RfPB Grant: PB-PG-0815-20034; ClinicalTrials.gov:213469).