Dataset Information

Validation of the modified Vesikari score in children with gastroenteritis in 5 US emergency departments.

ABSTRACT: The burden of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in US children is substantial. Research into outpatient treatment strategies has been hampered by the lack of easily used and validated gastroenteritis severity scales relevant to the populations studied. We sought to evaluate, in a US cohort, the reliability, construct validity, and generalizability of a gastroenteritis severity scale previously derived in a Canadian population, the modified Vesikari score (MVS).We conducted a prospective, cohort, clinical observational study of children 3 to 48 months of age with acute gastroenteritis presenting to 5 US emergency departments. A baseline MVS score was determined in the emergency department, and telephone follow-up 14 days after presentation was used to assign the follow-up MVS. We determined reliability using inter-item correlations; construct validity via principal component factor analysis; cross-sectional construct validity via correlations with the presence of dehydration, hospitalization, and day care and parental work absenteeism; and generalizability via score distribution among sites.Two hundred eighteen of 274 patients (80%) were successfully contacted for follow-up. Cronbach ? was 0.63, indicating expectedly low internal reliability because of the multidimensional properties of the MVS. Factor analysis supported the appropriateness of retaining all variables in the score. Disease severity correlated with dehydration (P < 0.001), hospitalization (P < 0.001), and subsequent day care (P = 0.01) and work (P < 0.001) absenteeism. The MVS was normally distributed, and scores did not differ among sites.The MVS effectively measures global severity of disease and performs similarly in varying populations within the US health care system. Its characteristics support its use in multisite outpatient clinical trials.

SUBMITTER: Schnadower D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3788842 | biostudies-other | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of the modified Vesikari score in children with gastroenteritis in 5 US emergency departments.

Schnadower David D Tarr Phillip I PI Gorelick Marc H MH O'Connell Karen K Roskind Cindy G CG Powell Elizabeth C EC Rao Jayashree J Bhatt Seema S Freedman Stephen B SB

Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition 20131001 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>The burden of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in US children is substantial. Research into outpatient treatment strategies has been hampered by the lack of easily used and validated gastroenteritis severity scales relevant to the populations studied. We sought to evaluate, in a US cohort, the reliability, construct validity, and generalizability of a gastroenteritis severity scale previously derived in a Canadian population, the modified Vesikari score (MVS).<h4>Methods</h4>We con ...[more]

PMID: 23676445

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe use of antiemetics for children with vomiting is one of the most controversial decisions in the treatment of gastroenteritis in developed countries. Ondansetron, a selective serotonin receptor antagonist, has been found to be effective in improving the success of oral rehydration therapy. However, North American and European clinical practice guidelines continue to recommend against its use, stating that evidence of cost savings would be required to support ondansetron administration. Thus, an economic analysis of the emergency department administration of ondansetron was conducted. The primary objective was to conduct a cost analysis of the routine administration of ondansetron in both the United States and Canada.Methods and findingsA cost analysis evaluated oral ondansetron administration to children presenting to emergency departments with vomiting and dehydration secondary to gastroenteritis from a societal and health care payer's perspective in both the US and Canada. A decision tree was developed that incorporated the frequency of vomiting, intravenous insertion, hospitalization, and emergency department revisits. Estimates of the monetary costs associated with ondansetron use, intravenous rehydration, and hospitalization were derived from administrative databases or emergency department use. The economic burden in children administered ondansetron plus oral rehydration therapy was compared to those not administered ondansetron employing deterministic and probabilistic simulations. We estimated the costs or savings to society and health care payers associated with the routine administration of ondansetron. Sensitivity analyses considered variations in costs, treatment effects, and exchange rates. In the US the administration of ondansetron to eligible children would prevent approximately 29,246 intravenous insertions and 7,220 hospitalizations annually. At the current average wholesale price, its routine administration to eligible children would annually save society US$65.6 million (US$49.1-US$81.1) and health care payers US$61.1 million (US$46.2-US$76.3). In Canada the administration of ondansetron to eligible children would prevent 4,065 intravenous insertions and 1,003 hospitalizations annually. Its routine administration would annually save society CDN$1.72 million (CDN$1.15-CDN$1.89) and the health care system CDN$1.18 million (CDN$0.88-CDN$1.41).ConclusionsIn countries where intravenous rehydration is often employed, the emergency department administration of oral ondansetron to children with dehydration and vomiting secondary to gastroenteritis results in significant monetary savings compared to a no-ondansetron policy. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:The study aimed to explore the use of diagnostics for febrile children presenting to European emergency departments (EDs), the determinants of inter-hospital variation, and the association between test use and hospitalization. We performed a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional observational study involving 28 paediatric EDs from 11 countries. A total of 4560 children < 16 years were included, with fever as reason for consultation. We excluded neonates and children with relevant comorbidities. Our primary outcome was the proportion of children receiving testing after primary evaluation, by country and by focus of infection. Variability between hospitals and effects of blood testing on patient disposition were explored by multilevel regression analyses, adjusting for patient characteristics (age group, triage level, appearance, fever duration, focus of infection) and hospital type (academic, teaching, other). The use of routine diagnostics varied widely, mostly in the use of blood tests, ranging from 3 to 75% overall across hospitals. Age < 3 months, high-acuity triage level, ill appearance, and suspicion of urinary tract infection displayed the strongest association with blood testing (odds ratios (OR) of 8.71 (95% CI 5.23-14.53), 19.46 (3.66-103.60), 3.13 (2.29-4.26), 10.84 (6.35-18.50), respectively). Blood testing remained highly variable across hospitals (median OR of the final model 2.36, 1.98-3.54). A positive association was observed between blood testing and hospitalization (OR 13.62, 9.00-20.61).Conclusionthe use of diagnostics for febrile children was highly variable across European EDs, yet patient and hospital characteristics could only partly explain inter-hospital variability. Focus groups of participating sites should help define reasons for unexpected variation.What is known• Although previous research has shown variation in the emergency department (ED) management of febrile children, there is limited information on the use of diagnostics in European EDs. • A deeper knowledge of variability and its determinants can steer optimization of care.What is new• The use of diagnostics for febrile children was highly variable across European EDs, yet patient and hospital characteristics could only partly explain inter-hospital variability. • Data on between-centre comparison offer opportunities to further explore factors influencing unwarranted variation.

Project description:BackgroundLimited information is available about predictors of short-term outcomes in patients with exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (eCOPD) attending an emergency department (ED). Such information could help stratify these patients and guide medical decision-making. The aim of this study was to develop a clinical prediction rule for short-term mortality during hospital admission or within a week after the index ED visit.MethodsThis was a prospective cohort study of patients with eCOPD attending the EDs of 16 participating hospitals. Recruitment started in June 2008 and ended in September 2010. Information on possible predictor variables was recorded during the time the patient was evaluated in the ED, at the time a decision was made to admit the patient to the hospital or discharge home, and during follow-up. Main short-term outcomes were death during hospital admission or within 1 week of discharge to home from the ED, as well as at death within 1 month of the index ED visit. Multivariate logistic regression models were developed in a derivation sample and validated in a validation sample. The score was compared with other published prediction rules for patients with stable COPD.ResultsIn total, 2,487 patients were included in the study. Predictors of death during hospital admission, or within 1 week of discharge to home from the ED were patient age, baseline dyspnea, previous need for long-term home oxygen therapy or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, altered mental status, and use of inspiratory accessory muscles or paradoxical breathing upon ED arrival (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.85). Addition of arterial blood gas parameters (oxygen and carbon dioxide partial pressures (PO2 and PCO2)) and pH) did not improve the model. The same variables were predictors of death at 1 month (AUC = 0.85). Compared with other commonly used tools for predicting the severity of COPD in stable patients, our rule was significantly better.ConclusionsFive clinical predictors easily available in the ED, and also in the primary care setting, can be used to create a simple and easily obtained score that allows clinicians to stratify patients with eCOPD upon ED arrival and guide the medical decision-making process.

Project description:The use of antiemetics for vomiting in acute gastroenteritis in children is still a matter of debate. We conducted a double-blind randomized trial to evaluate whether a single oral dose of ondansetron vs domperidone or placebo improves outcomes in children with gastroenteritis. After failure of initial oral rehydration administration, children aged 1-6 years admitted for gastroenteritis to the pediatric emergency departments of 15 hospitals in Italy were randomized to receive one oral dose of ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg) or domperidone (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo. The primary outcome was the percentage of children receiving nasogastric or intravenous rehydration. A p value of 0.014 was used to indicate statistical significance (and 98.6% CI were calculated) as a result of having carried out two interim analyses. 1,313 children were eligible for the first attempt with oral rehydration solution, which was successful for 832 (63.4%); 356 underwent randomization (the parents of 125 children did not give consent): 118 to placebo, 119 to domperidone, and 119 to ondansetron. Fourteen (11.8%) needed intravenous rehydration in the ondansetron group vs 30 (25.2%) and 34 (28.8%) in the domperidone and placebo groups, respectively. Ondansetron reduced the risk of intravenous rehydration by over 50%, both vs placebo (RR 0.41, 98.6% CI 0.20-0.83) and domperidone (RR 0.47, 98.6% CI 0.23-0.97). No differences for adverse events were seen among groups. In a context of emergency care, 6 out of 10 children aged 1-6 years with vomiting due to gastroenteritis and without severe dehydration can be managed effectively with administration of oral rehydration solution alone. In children who fail oral rehydration, a single oral dose of ondansetron reduces the need for intravenous rehydration and the percentage of children who continue to vomit, thereby facilitating the success of oral rehydration. Domperidone was not effective for the symptomatic treatment of vomiting during acute gastroenteritis.

Project description:BackgroundPredicting mortality from COVID-19 using information available when patients present to the emergency department can inform goals-of-care decisions and assist with ethical allocation of critical care resources. The study objective was to develop and validate a clinical score to predict emergency department and in-hospital mortality among consecutive nonpalliative patients with COVID-19; in this study, we define palliative patients as those who do not want resuscitative measures, such as intubation, intensive care unit care or cardiopulmonary resuscitation.MethodsThis derivation and validation study used observational cohort data recruited from 46 hospitals in 8 Canadian provinces participating in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN). We included adult (age ≥ 18 yr) nonpalliative patients with confirmed COVID-19 who presented to the emergency department of a participating site between Mar. 1, 2020, and Jan. 31, 2021. We randomly assigned hospitals to derivation or validation, and prespecified clinical variables as candidate predictors. We used logistic regression to develop the score in a derivation cohort and examined its performance in predicting emergency department and in-hospital mortality in a validation cohort.ResultsOf 8761 eligible patients, 618 (7.0%) died. The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score included age, sex, type of residence, arrival mode, chest pain, severe liver disease, respiratory rate and level of respiratory support. The area under the curve was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.93) in derivation and 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.93) in validation. The score had excellent calibration. These results suggest that scores of 6 or less would categorize patients as being at low risk for in-hospital death, with a negative predictive value of 99.9%. Patients in the low-risk group had an in-hospital mortality rate of 0.1%. Patients with a score of 15 or higher had an observed mortality rate of 81.0%.InterpretationThe CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score is a simple score that can be used for level-of-care discussions with patients and in situations of critical care resource constraints to accurately predict death using variables available on emergency department arrival. The score was derived and validated mostly in unvaccinated patients, and before variants of concern were circulating widely and newer treatment regimens implemented in Canada.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04702945.

Project description:Children constitute 6-10% of all patients attending the emergency department (ED) by emergency medical services (EMS). However, discordant EMS use in children occurs in 37-61% with fever as an important risk factor. We aimed to describe EMS utilisation among febrile children attending European EDs. This study is part of an observational multicentre study assessing management and outcome in febrile children up to 18 years (MOFICHE) attending twelve EDs in eight European countries. Discordant EMS use was defined as the absence of markers of urgency including intermediate/high triage urgency, advanced diagnostics, treatment, and admission in children transferred by EMS. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed for the association between (1) EMS use and markers of urgency, and (2) patient characteristics and discordant EMS use after adjusting all analyses for the covariates age, gender, visiting hours, presenting symptoms, and ED setting. A total of 5464 (15%, range 0.1-42%) children attended the ED by EMS. Markers of urgency were more frequently present in the EMS group compared with the non-EMS group. Discordant EMS use occurred in 1601 children (29%, range 1-59%). Age and gender were not associated with discordant EMS use, whereas neurological symptoms were associated with less discordant EMS use (aOR 0.2, 95%CI 0.1-0.2), and attendance out of office hours was associated with more discordant EMS use (aOR 1.6, 95%CI 1.4-1.9). Settings with higher percentage of self-referrals to the ED had more discordant EMS use (p < 0.05). Conclusion: There is large practice variation in EMS use in febrile children attending European EDs. Markers of urgency were more frequently present in children in the EMS group. However, discordant EMS use occurred in 29%. Further research is needed on non-medical factors influencing discordant EMS use in febrile children across Europe, so that pre-emptive strategies can be implemented. What is Known: •Children constitute around 6-10% of all patients attending the emergency department by emergency medical services. •Discordant EMS use occurs in 37-61% of all children, with fever as most common presenting symptom for discordant EMS use in children. What is New: •There is large practice variation in EMS use among febrile children across Europe with discordance EMS use occurring in 29% (range 1-59%), which was associated with attendance during out of office hours and with settings with higher percentage of self-referrals to the ED. •Future research is needed focusing on non-medical factors (socioeconomic status, parental preferences and past experience, healthcare systems, referral pathways, out of hours services provision) that influence discordant EMS use in febrile children across Europe.

Dataset Information

Validation of the modified Vesikari score in children with gastroenteritis in 5 US emergency departments.

Publications

Validation of the modified Vesikari score in children with gastroenteritis in 5 US emergency departments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets