Dataset Information

Prediction of acute appendicitis among patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain at emergency department.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Early screening and accurately identifying Acute Appendicitis (AA) among patients with undifferentiated symptoms associated with appendicitis during their emergency visit will improve patient safety and health care quality. The aim of the study was to compare models that predict AA among patients with undifferentiated symptoms at emergency visits using both structured data and free-text data from a national survey.

Methods

We performed a secondary data analysis on the 2005-2017 United States National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) data to estimate the association between emergency department (ED) patients with the diagnosis of AA, and the demographic and clinical factors present at ED visits during a patient's ED stay. We used binary logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) models incorporating natural language processing (NLP) to predict AA diagnosis among patients with undifferentiated symptoms.

Results

Among the 40,441 ED patients with assigned International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes of AA and appendicitis-related symptoms between 2005 and 2017, 655 adults (2.3%) and 256 children (2.2%) had AA. For the LR model identifying AA diagnosis among adult ED patients, the c-statistic was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.75) for structured variables only, 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.75) for unstructured variables only, and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.76-0.80) when including both structured and unstructured variables. For the LR model identifying AA diagnosis among pediatric ED patients, the c-statistic was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.79-0.89) for including structured variables only, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.72-0.84) for unstructured variables, and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83-0.91) when including both structured and unstructured variables. The RF method showed similar c-statistic to the corresponding LR model.

Conclusions

We developed predictive models that can predict the AA diagnosis for adult and pediatric ED patients, and the predictive accuracy was improved with the inclusion of NLP elements and approaches.

SUBMITTER: Su D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8759254 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Abdominal pain represents greater than 20% of US Emergency Department (ED) visits due to a wide range of illnesses. There are currently no reliable blood biomarkers to predict serious outcomes in patients with abdominal pain. Our previous studies have identified three mRNA transcripts related to innate immune activation: alkaline phosphatase (ALPL), interleukin-8 receptor-β (IL8RB), and defensin-1 (DEFA1) as promising candidates to detect an intra-abdominal infection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of these mRNA biomarkers to predict likely infection, hospitalization and surgery in Emergency Department patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain. We prospectively enrolled Emergency Department patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain who received an abdominal CT scan as part of their evaluation. Clinical outcomes were abstracted from the CT scan and medical records. mRNA biomarker levels were calculated independent of the clinical outcomes and their accuracy was assessed to predict infectious diagnoses, surgery and hospital admission. 89 patients were enrolled; 21 underwent surgery; 47 underwent hospital admission; and, no deaths were observed within 30 days. In identifying which cases were likely infectious, mRNA biomarkers' AUC values were: ALPL, 0.83; DEFA1 0.51; IL8RB, 0.74; and ALPL + IL8RB, 0.79. In predicting which Emergency Department patients would receive surgery, the AUC values were: ALPL, 0.75; DEFA1, 0.58; IL8RB, 0.75; and ALPL + IL8RB, 0.76. In predicting hospital admission, the AUC values were: ALPL, 0.78; DEFA1, 0.52; IL8RB, 0.74; and, ALPL + IL8RB, 0.77. For predicting surgery, ALPL + IL8RB's positive likelihood ratio (LR) was 3.97; negative LR (NLR) was 0.70. For predicting hospital admission, the same marker's positive LR was 2.80 with an NLR of 0.45. Where the primary cause for admission was a potentially infectious disorder, 33 of 34 cases (97%) had positive RNA scores. In a pragmatic, prospective diagnostic accuracy trial in Emergency Department patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain, mRNA biomarkers showed good accuracy to identify patients with potential infection, as well as those needing surgery or hospital admission.

Project description:BackgroundAcute abdominal pain (AAP) is a major driver for capacity-use in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. Yet, the health care utilization of patients with AAP before and after the ED remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to describe adult patients presenting to the ED with AAP and their outpatient care (OC) use before and after the ED. Secondary objectives included description of hospitalization rates, in-hospital mortality, ED re-visits, and exploration of potential risk factors for hospitalization and ED re-visits.MethodsFor the analysis, we combined routine hospital data from patients who visited 15 EDs in Germany in 2016 with their statutory health insurance OC claims data from 2014 to 2017. Adult patients were included based on a chief complaint or an ED diagnosis indicating unspecific AAP or the Manchester Triage System indicator "Abdominal pain in adults". Baseline characteristics, ED diagnosis, frequency and reason of hospitalization, frequency and type of prior-OC (prOC) use up to 3 days before and of post-OC use up to 30 days after the ED visit.Main resultsWe identified 28,085 adults aged ≥ 20 years with AAP. 39.8% were hospitalized, 33.9% sought prOC before the ED visit (48.6% of them were hospitalized) and 62.7% sought post-OC up to 30 days after the ED visit. Hospitalization was significantly more likely for elderly patients (aged 65 and above vs. younger; adjusted OR 3.05 [95% CI 2.87; 3.25]), prOC users (1.71 [1.61; 1.90]) and men (1.44 [1.37; 1.52]). In-hospital mortality rate was 3.1% overall. Re-visiting the ED within 30 days was more likely for elderly patients (1.32 [1.13; 1.55) and less likely for those with prOC use (0.37 [0.31; 0.44]).ConclusionsprOC use was associated with more frequent hospitalizations but fewer ED re-visits. ED visits by prOC patients without subsequent hospitalization may indicate difficulties of OC resources to meet the complex diagnostic requirements and expectations of this patient population. Fewer ED re-visits in prOC users indicate effective care in this subgroup.

Project description:STUDY OBJECTIVE:We compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine with that of hydromorphone for the treatment of acute abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). METHODS:This was a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial conducted in 2 EDs in the Bronx, NY. Adults weighing 60 to 120 kg were randomized to receive 120 mg of intravenous lidocaine or 1 mg of intravenous hydromorphone. Thirty minutes after administration of the first dose of the study drug, participants were asked whether they needed a second dose of the investigational medication to which they were randomized. Patients were also stratified according to clinical suspicion of nephrolithiasis. The primary outcome was improvement in pain scores of 0 to 10 between baseline and 90 minutes. An important secondary outcome was need for "off-protocol" parenteral analgesics, including opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. RESULTS:We enrolled 154 patients, of whom 77 received lidocaine and 77 received hydromorphone. By 90 minutes, patients randomized to lidocaine improved by a mean of 3.8 points on the 0-to-10 scale, whereas those randomized to hydromorphone improved by a mean of 5.0 points (mean difference 1.2; 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 2.2). Need for off-protocol "rescue" analgesics occurred for 39 of 77 lidocaine patients (51%) and 20 of 77 hydromorphone patients (26%) (difference 25%; 95% confidence interval 10% to 40%). Adverse events were comparable between groups. Among the subset of 22 patients with nephrolithiasis, lidocaine patients reported a mean improvement of 3.4 points on the pain scale, whereas hydromorphone patients reported a mean improvement of 6.4 points (mean difference 3.0; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 5.5). CONCLUSION:Intravenous hydromorphone was superior to intravenous lidocaine both for general abdominal pain and a subset of patients with nephrolithiasis. A majority of patients randomly allocated to lidocaine required additional analgesics.

Project description:IntroductionRacial disparities in pain management have been reported among emergency department (ED) patients. In this study we evaluated the association between patients' self-identified race/ethnicity and the administration of opioid analgesia among ED patients with abdominal pain, the most common chief complaint for ED presentations in the United States.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of adult (age ≥18 years) patients who presented to the ED of a single center with abdominal pain from January 1, 2019-December 31, 2020. We collected demographic and clinical information, including patients' race and ethnicity, from the electronic health record. The primary outcome was the ED administration of any opioid analgesic (binary). Secondary outcomes included the administration of non-opioid analgesia (binary) and administration of any analgesia (binary). We used logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (OR) of the association between a patient's race/ethnicity and analgesia administration. Covariates included age, sex, initial pain score, Emergency Severity Index, and ED visits in the prior 30 days. Subgroup analyses were performed in non-pregnant patients, those who underwent any imaging study, were admitted to the hospital, and who underwent surgery within 24 hours of ED arrival.ResultsWe studied 7,367 patients: 45% (3,314) were non-Hispanic (NH) White; 28% (2,092) were Hispanic/Latinx; 19% (1,384) were NH Black, and 8% (577) were Asian. Overall, 44% (3,207) of patients received opioid analgesia. In multivariable regression models, non-White patients were less likely to receive opioid analgesia compared with White patients (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.83 for Hispanic/Latinx patients; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.72 for Black patients; and OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78 for Asian patients). Black patients were also less likely to receive non-opioid analgesia, and Black and Hispanic/Latinx patients were less likely than White patients to receive any analgesia. The associations were similar across subgroups; however, the association was attenuated among patients who underwent surgery within 24 hours of ED arrival.ConclusionHispanic/Latinx, Black, and Asian patients were significantly less likely to receive opioid analgesia than White patients when presenting to the ED with abdominal pain. Black patients were also less likely than White patients to receive non-opioid analgesia.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The HEART Pathway (history, ECG, age, risk factors, and initial troponin) is an accelerated diagnostic protocol designed to identify low-risk emergency department patients with chest pain for early discharge without stress testing or angiography. The objective of this study was to determine whether implementation of the HEART Pathway is safe (30-day death and myocardial infarction rate <1% in low-risk patients) and effective (reduces 30-day hospitalizations) in emergency department patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. METHODS:A prospective pre-post study was conducted at 3 US sites among 8474 adult emergency department patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. Patients included were ≥21 years old, investigated for possible acute coronary syndrome, and had no evidence of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction on ECG. Accrual occurred for 12 months before and after HEART Pathway implementation from November 2013 to January 2016. The HEART Pathway accelerated diagnostic protocol was integrated into the electronic health record at each site as an interactive clinical decision support tool. After accelerated diagnostic protocol integration, ED providers prospectively used the HEART Pathway to identify patients with possible acute coronary syndrome as low risk (appropriate for early discharge without stress testing or angiography) or non-low risk (appropriate for further in-hospital evaluation). The primary safety and effectiveness outcomes, death, and myocardial infarction (MI) and hospitalization rates at 30 days were determined from health records, insurance claims, and death index data. RESULTS:Preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts included 3713 and 4761 patients, respectively. The HEART Pathway identified 30.7% as low risk; 0.4% of these patients experienced death or MI within 30 days. Hospitalization at 30 days was reduced by 6% in the postimplementation versus preimplementation cohort (55.6% versus 61.6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87). During the index visit, more MIs were detected in the postimplementation cohort (6.6% versus 5.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.12-1.65). Rates of death or MI during follow-up were similar (1.1% versus 1.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.33). CONCLUSIONS:HEART Pathway implementation was associated with decreased hospitalizations, increased identification of index visit MIs, and a very low death and MI rate among low-risk patients. These findings support use of the HEART Pathway to identify low-risk patients who can be safely discharged without stress testing or angiography. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02056964.