O20 Quick, simple and just as effective—comparing pm: L3 ratio to NELA, P-POSSUM and NSQIP scores in assessing mortality risk for emergency laparotomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Y Ming ◽  
M Holmes ◽  
P Pockney ◽  
J Gani
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Acs Nsqip ◽  
Psoas Muscles ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Introduction Multiple tools (NELA, P-POSSUM, ACS-NSQIP) are available to assess mortality risks in patients requiring emergency laparotomy(1–3), but they are time-consuming to perform and have had limited uptake in routine clinical practice in many countries(4). Simpler measures, including psoas muscle: L3 vertebrae (PM: L3) ratio(5,6), may be useful alternates. This measure is quick to perform, requiring no special skills or equipment apart from basic CT viewing software. Method We performed an analysis on all patients in the Hunter Emergency Laparotomy Audit (HELA) database, from January 2016 to December 2017. HELA is a retrospective review of all emergency laparotomy undertaken in a discrete area in NSW, Australia. Patients with an available CT abdomen were included (N = 500/562). A single slice axial CT image at the L3 endplate level was analysed using ImageJ® software to measure the area of L3 and bilateral psoas muscles. This can be done using normal PACS software in routine practice. Result PM: L3 ratios in this cohort have a mean of 1.082 (95%CI 1.042–1.122; range 0.141–3.934). PM: L3 ratio is significantly lower (P < 0.00001) in those patients who did not survive beyond 30 days (mean 0.865 [95% CI 0.746–0.984]) and 90 days (mean 0.888 [95%CI 0.768–1.008]) compared to patients that survived these periods (30 day mean 1.106 [95% vs. 1.033–1.179], 90 day mean 1.112 [95% CI 1.070–1.154]). These associations are similar to those calculated by established risk assessment models. Conclusion PM: L3 ratio is a reliable, quick and easy risk assessment tool to identify high risk patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Take-home Message PM: L3 ratio is a reliable, quick and easy risk assessment tool to identify high risk patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. It is comparable to NELA, P-POSSUM and ACS-NSQIP.

677 Quick, Simple and just as Effective – Comparing PM:L3 Ratio to NELA, P-POSSUM and NSQIP Scores for Emergency Laparotomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Y Ming ◽  
M Holmes ◽  
P Pockney ◽  
J Gani
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Mortality Risks ◽  
Risk Assessment Models ◽  
Psoas Muscles ◽  
Discrete Area ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Axial Ct

Abstract Aim Multiple tools (NELA, P-POSSUM, ACS-NSQIP) are available to assess mortality risks in patients requiring emergency laparotomy(1–3), but they are time-consuming to perform and have had limited uptake in routine clinical practice in many countries(4). Simpler measures, including psoas muscle:L3 vertebrae (PM:L3) ratio(5,6), may be useful alternates. This measure is quick to perform, requiring no special skills or equipment apart from basic CT viewing software. Method We performed an analysis on all patients in the Hunter Emergency Laparotomy Audit (HELA) database, from January 2016 to December 2017. HELA is a retrospective review of all emergency laparotomy undertaken in a discrete area in NSW, Australia. Patients with an available CT abdomen were included (N = 500/562). A single slice axial CT image at the L3 endplate level was analysed using ImageJ® software to measure the area of L3 and bilateral psoas muscles. This can be done using normal PACS software in routine practice. Results PM:L3 ratios in this cohort have a mean of 1.082 (95%CI 1.042-1.122; range 0.141-3.934). PM:L3 ratio is significantly lower (p < 0.00001) in those patients who did not survive beyond 30 days (mean 0.865 [95% CI 0.746-0.984 ]) and 90 days (mean 0.888 [95%CI 0.768-1.008]) compared to patients that survived these periods (30 day mean 1.106 [95% vs. 1.033-1.179], 90 day mean 1.112 [95% CI 1.070-1.154]) . These associations are similar to those calculated by established risk assessment models. Conclusions PM:L3 ratio is a reliable, quick and easy risk assessment tool to identify high risk patients undergoing emergency laparotomy.

scholarly journals Feasibility of a structured risk assessment tool in general adult psychiatry admissions

2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (11) ◽  
pp. 418-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Smith ◽  
Tom White
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Royal Hospital ◽  
Comorbid Diagnosis ◽  
Adult Psychiatry ◽  
Risk Patients

AIMS AND METHODTo assess the feasibility of using a structured risk assessment tool (Historical Clinical Risk 20-Item (HCR–20) Scale) in general adult psychiatry admissions and the characteristics of ‘high-risk’ patients. A notes review and interviews were used to conduct an HCR–20 assessment of 135 patients admitted to Murray Royal Hospital, Scotland.RESULTSPatients scoring higher on the HCR–20 were discharged earlier and more likely to have a diagnosis of personality disorder and a comorbid diagnosis.CLINICAL IMPLICATIONSIt was possible to complete an HCR–20 assessment of over 80% of patients within 48 h of admission.

scholarly journals Pre-NELA vs NELA – has anything changed, or is it just an audit exercise?

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (8) ◽  
pp. 554-559 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Mak ◽  
AR Hakeem ◽  
V Chitre
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Uneventful Recovery ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Possum Score ◽  
Operative Severity Score ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Set Up

BACKGROUND Following evidence suggestive of high mortality following emergency laparotomies, the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) was set up, highlighting key standards in emergency service provision. Our aim was to compare our NHS trust’s adherence to these recommendations immediately prior to, and following, the launch of NELA, and to compare patient outcome. METHODS This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent an emergency laparotomy over the course of 6 months – 3 months either side of the initiation of NELA. RESULTS There were 44 patients before the initiation of NELA (pre-NELA, PN group) and 55 in the first 3 months of NELA (N group). We saw a significant increase in the proportion of patients whose decision to operate was made by the consultant: 75.0% in the PN group vs 100% in N group (subsequent data presented in this order) (P < 0.001). The presence of a consultant surgeon (75.0% vs 83.6%, P = 0.321) and anaesthetist (100.0% vs 90.9%, P = 0.064) in theatres were comparable in both groups. Risk stratification based on Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (P-POSSUM) score showed no difference in high-risk patients in both groups (47.7% vs 36.4%, P = 0.306). With the NELA initiative, however, significantly more patients were admitted directly from theatres to the critical care unit, when compared with the pre-NELA period (9.1% vs 27.3%, P = 0.038). This also reflected a significant reduction in unexpected escalation to a higher level of care during this period (10.0% vs 0%, P = 0.036). Significantly more patients had uneventful recovery in the NELA period (52.3 vs 76.4%, P = 0.018), although there was no difference in 30-day mortality between the groups (2.3% vs 7.3%, P = 0.378). CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated a greater degree of consultant involvement in the decision to operate during NELA. More high-risk patients have been identified preoperatively with diligent risk assessment and, hence, have been proactively admitted to critical care units following laparotomy, which may account for the significant reduction in unexpected escalation to level 2 or level 3 care and thus in overall better patient outcomes.

scholarly journals Initial Experience in Predicting the Risk of Hospitalization of 496 Outpatients with COVID-19 Using a Telemedicine Risk Assessment Tool

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
James B O'Keefe ◽  
Elizabeth J Tong ◽  
Thomas H Taylor ◽  
Ghazala D Datoo O'Keefe ◽  
David C Tong
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Tier 2 ◽  
Tier 1 ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Tier 3

Objective: To determine whether a risk prediction tool developed and implemented in March 2020 accurately predicts subsequent hospitalizations. Design: Retrospective cohort study, enrollment from March 24 to May 26, 2020 with follow-up calls until hospitalization or clinical improvement (final calls until June 19, 2020) Setting: Single center telemedicine program managing outpatients from a large medical system in Atlanta, Georgia Participants: 496 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in isolation at home. Exclusion criteria included: (1) hospitalization prior to telemedicine program enrollment, (2) immediate discharge with no follow-up calls due to resolution. Exposure: Acute COVID-19 illness Main Outcome and Measures: Hospitalization was the outcome. Days to hospitalization was the metric. Survival analysis using Cox regression was used to determine factors associated with hospitalization. Results: The risk-assessment rubric assigned 496 outpatients to risk tiers as follows: Tier 1, 237 (47.8%); Tier 2, 185 (37.3%); Tier 3, 74 (14.9%). Subsequent hospitalizations numbered 3 (1%), 15 (7%), and 17 (23%) and for Tiers 1-3, respectively. From a Cox regression model with age ≥ 60, gender, and self-reported obesity as covariates, the adjusted hazard ratios using Tier 1 as reference were: Tier 2 HR=3.74 (95% CI, 1.06-13.27; P=0.041); Tier 3 HR=10.87 (95% CI, 3.09-38.27; P<0.001). Tier was the strongest predictor of time to hospitalization. Conclusions and Relevance: A telemedicine risk assessment tool prospectively applied to an outpatient population with COVID-19 identified both low-risk and high-risk patients with better performance than individual risk factors alone. This approach may be appropriate for optimum allocation of resources.

Cardiovascular risk assessment in diabetes and pre-diabetes

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 923-924
Author(s):  
Nikolaus Marx
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Target Organ Damage ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Artery Disease ◽  
Very High

Patients with diabetes exhibit an increased propensity to develop cardiovascular disease with an increased mortality. Early risk assessment, especially for coronary artery disease, is important to initiate therapeutic strategies to reduce cardiovascular risk. This chapter reviews the current literature on risk scores in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and summarizes the role of risk assessment based on biomarkers and different imaging strategies. Current guidelines recommend that patients with diabetes are characterized as high-risk or very high-risk patients. In the presence of target organ damage or other risk factors such as smoking, marked hypercholesterolaemia, or hypertension, patients with diabetes are classified as very high-risk patients while most other people with diabetes are categorized as high-risk patients.

scholarly journals Successful Model for Guideline Implementation to Prevent Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in the Ambulatory Cancer Clinic

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e868-e874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris E. Holmes ◽  
Steven Ades ◽  
Susan Gilchrist ◽  
Daniel Douce ◽  
Karen Libby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Guideline Implementation ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Successful Model ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism Prevention ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Cancer Associated Thrombosis

PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment in outpatients with cancer and pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in selected patients at high risk for VTE. Although validated risk stratification tools are available, < 10% of oncologists use a risk assessment tool, and rates of VTE prophylaxis in high-risk patients are low in practice. We hypothesized that implementation of a systems-based program that uses the electronic health record (EHR) and offers personalized VTE prophylaxis recommendations would increase VTE risk assessment rates in patients initiating outpatient chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in the Ambulatory Cancer Clinic (VTEPACC) was a multidisciplinary program implemented by nurses, oncologists, pharmacists, hematologists, advanced practice providers, and quality partners. We prospectively identified high-risk patients using the Khorana and Protecht scores (≥ 3 points) via an EHR-based risk assessment tool. Patients with a predicted high risk of VTE during treatment were offered a hematology consultation to consider VTE prophylaxis. Results of the consultation were communicated to the treating oncologist, and clinical outcomes were tracked. RESULTS: A total of 918 outpatients with cancer initiating cancer-directed therapy were evaluated. VTE monthly education rates increased from < 5% before VTEPACC to 81.6% (standard deviation [SD], 11.9; range, 63.6%-97.7%) during the implementation phase and 94.7% (SD, 4.9; range, 82.1%-100%) for the full 2-year postimplementation phase. In the postimplementation phase, 213 patients (23.2%) were identified as being at high risk for developing a VTE. Referrals to hematology were offered to 151 patients (71%), with 141 patients (93%) being assessed and 93.8% receiving VTE prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: VTEPACC is a successful model for guideline implementation to provide VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis to prevent cancer-associated thrombosis in outpatients. Methods applied can readily translate into practice and overcome the current implementation gaps between guidelines and clinical practice.

scholarly journals EP.FRI.974 NELA 30 day mortality: A single centre experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
M A Gok ◽  
O Shams ◽  
F Ftaieh ◽  
U A Khan
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Survival Curve ◽  
Emergency Laparotomy ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Single Centre Experience ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
The Uk ◽  
National Emergency

Abstract Aims National emergency laparotomy audit (NELA) developed in 2014 in the UK, aims to improve of quality of care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. NELA highlights the importance of identifying high risk patients for potential significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to review the NELA 30 day mortality at a single centre. Methods This is a retrospective review of all 30 day NELA mortality patients since 2014 carried out at East Cheshire NHS Trust until January 2020. The NELA survivors beyond 30 days were used as controls. Results Conclusion The overall NELA 30 day mortality rate was 9.8 %. NELA deaths occurred in the older, frail, multi-comorbid & high ASA status patients. Most NELA deaths occur within 90 days, whereas patient survival curve appears to plateau out beyond 90 days. P possum can be used to identify high risk patients, where early collaborative senior assessment by consultant surgeons, anaesthetists and intensivists may identify and allocate appropriate surgical intervention. 

scholarly journals TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS PREDICTION IN MALAYSIA USING MODIFIED DIABETES RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-21
Author(s):  
Aung Myo Oo ◽  
Al-abed Ali Ahmed Al-abed ◽  
Ohn Mar Lwin ◽  
Sowmya Sham Kanneppady ◽  
Tee Yee Sim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Type 2 Dm

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is becoming major health threat worldwide and it is extremely common in clinical setting. Malaysia is one of the highest diabetic populations among Asian countries and the new cases are increasing day to day. Early detection of people with high risk of Type 2 DM by using simple, easy and cost-effective assessment tool is the better way to identify and prevent the community from this non-communicable disease. The objectives of the study were to identify those are high risk to become type 2DM among Malaysians by using risk scoring form and to educate them how to prevent it. Total 591 subjects were recruited from the health screening programs carried out by the collaboration of Petaling Jaya Development Council (MBPJ) and Lincoln University College, Malaysia. Modified form of Finnish Type 2 Diabetes Risk Assessment Tool was used to identify people at risk of becoming type 2 DM. Descriptive analysis was performed for all included variables in this study by using SPSS version 21. The study found out that almost half of the participants were found to have family history of DM, 60% of them were overweight and obese and 47% were having above normal waist circumference. We observed that nearly 60 % of participants in the study were having moderate to high risk of becoming type 2 DM in next 10 years. To conclude, the result of our study would be helpful in implementation of cost-effective, convenient Type 2 DM risk assessment tool which has yet to be implemented in Malaysia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document