scholarly journals Use of a Telemedicine Risk Assessment Tool to Predict the Risk of Hospitalization of 496 Outpatients With COVID-19: Retrospective Analysis (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
James B O'Keefe ◽  
Elizabeth J Tong ◽  
Thomas H Taylor Jr ◽  
Ghazala A Datoo O’Keefe ◽  
David C Tong
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Health Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Tier 2 ◽  
Tier 1 ◽  
Tier 3

BACKGROUND Risk assessment of patients with acute COVID-19 in a telemedicine context is not well described. In settings of large numbers of patients, a risk assessment tool may guide resource allocation not only for patient care but also for maximum health care and public health benefit. OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to determine whether a COVID-19 telemedicine risk assessment tool accurately predicts hospitalizations. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study of a COVID-19 telemedicine home monitoring program serving health care workers and the community in Atlanta, Georgia, with enrollment from March 24 to May 26, 2020; the final call range was from March 27 to June 19, 2020. All patients were assessed by medical providers using an institutional COVID-19 risk assessment tool designating patients as Tier 1 (low risk for hospitalization), Tier 2 (intermediate risk for hospitalization), or Tier 3 (high risk for hospitalization). Patients were followed with regular telephone calls to an endpoint of improvement or hospitalization. Using survival analysis by Cox regression with days to hospitalization as the metric, we analyzed the performance of the risk tiers and explored individual patient factors associated with risk of hospitalization. RESULTS Providers using the risk assessment rubric assigned 496 outpatients to tiers: Tier 1, 237 out of 496 (47.8%); Tier 2, 185 out of 496 (37.3%); and Tier 3, 74 out of 496 (14.9%). Subsequent hospitalizations numbered 3 out of 237 (1.3%) for Tier 1, 15 out of 185 (8.1%) for Tier 2, and 17 out of 74 (23%) for Tier 3. From a Cox regression model with age of 60 years or older, gender, and reported obesity as covariates, the adjusted hazard ratios for hospitalization using Tier 1 as reference were 3.74 (95% CI 1.06-13.27; <i>P</i>=.04) for Tier 2 and 10.87 (95% CI 3.09-38.27; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) for Tier 3. CONCLUSIONS A telemedicine risk assessment tool prospectively applied to an outpatient population with COVID-19 identified populations with low, intermediate, and high risk of hospitalization.

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.

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.

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 &lt; 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.

scholarly journals A114 DEVELOPING AND VALIDATING A PATIENT RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL TO PREDICT POST-ERCP PANCREATITIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 93-94
Author(s):  
R A MacMillan ◽  
T Ponich
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
Prophylactic Measures

Abstract Background Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), the most common complication of ERCP, can lead to significant patient morbidity and even mortality. Both American (ASGE) and European (ESGE) guidelines emphasize the importance of assessing PEP risk among patients about to undergo ERCP so appropriate preventative measures can be initiated. Though multiple PEP risk factors have been identified, an ideal risk assessment tool has not yet been developed that accurately predicts PEP risk among ERCP patients. An ideal PEP risk factor screening tool would be one that most sensitively identifies patients likely to benefit from PEP preventative measures. We have developed a patient PEP risk screening tool based on both ASGE and ESGE guidelines (Table 1) and analyzed its accuracy predicting PEP rates in our clinical practice. Aims We investigated whether the ERCP patient and procedural risk factors listed in the ASGE and ESGE guidelines were linked to PEP rates using a novel PEP risk screening tool in patients undergoing ERCP. Methods Retrospective chart reviews of patients undergoing ERCP were performed within a single clinician’s practice at the London Health Science Centre, Victoria Hospital, between January 2016 and October 2019 to: 1) assess the proportion of patients identified as high PEP risk using our novel PEP risk screening tool; 2) determine whether a high PEP risk score using this tool was linked to higher PEP rates following ERCP; and 3) identify the absolute score threshold that best delineates patients at higher risk. A chi-square test of independence was performed to examine the relationship between high PEP risk identified via screening and the actual PEP rate following ERCP. Results Five hundred sixty-one patients who underwent ERCP were assessed using the new PEP risk screening tool. Among those patients, 6.6% (37/561) developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. Using the screening tool, 79.5% (446/561) were identified as high risk, using a cut-off score of 1; the score with the highest sensitivity (95%) and specificity (22%) combination. Identifying high PEP risk patients at this cut-off was significantly linked to increased PEP rates in patients who underwent ERCP (X2 = 5.5; df = 1, p &lt; .05). Conclusions Using a cut-off score of 1, the PEP risk screening tool was very sensitive, but relatively non-specific at identifying patients who went on to develop post-ERCP pancreatitis. We hope that, based on these findings, high-risk patient identification can be improved, so more aggressive and appropriately-targeted prophylactic measures against PEP can be provided. Funding Agencies None

Hemorrhage Risk Assessment on Admission: Utility for Prediction of Maternal Morbidity

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Homa K. Ahmadzia ◽  
Jaclyn M. Phillips ◽  
Rose Kleiman ◽  
Alexis C. Gimovsky ◽  
Susan Bathgate ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Maternal Morbidity ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Maternal Outcomes ◽  
Hemorrhage Risk ◽  
Low Risk Women

Objective Hemorrhage is a major cause of maternal morbidity and mortality prompting creation of innovative risk assessment tools to identify patients at highest risk. We aimed to investigate the association of hemorrhage risk assessment with maternal morbidity and to evaluate maternal outcomes after implementation of the risk assessment across hospital sites. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of a multicenter database including women admitted to labor and delivery from January 2015 to June 2018. The Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses risk assessment tool was used to categorize patients as low, medium, or high risk for hemorrhage. Multivariate logistic regression was used to describe the association between hemorrhage risk score and markers of maternal morbidity and evaluate maternal outcomes before and after standardized implementations of the risk assessment tool. Results In this study, 14,861 women were categorized as low risk (26%), 26,080 (46%) moderate risk, and 15,730 (28%) high risk (N = 56,671 births). For women with high-risk scores, the relative risk (RR) ratio compared with low-risk women was 4.9 (RR: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.2–7.4) for blood transfusion and 5.2 (RR: 95% CI: 4.6–5.9) for estimated blood loss (EBL) ≥ 1,000 mL. For the second objective, 110,633 women were available for pre- and postimplementation analyses (39,027 and 71,606, respectively). A 20% reduction in rates of blood transfusion (0.5–0.4%, p = 0.02) and EBL ≥ 1,000 mL (6.3–5.9%, p = 0.014) was observed between pre- and postimplementations of the admission hemorrhage risk assessment tool. Conclusion Women who were deemed high risk for hemorrhage using a hemorrhage risk assessment tool had five times higher risk for blood transfusion and EBL ≥ 1,000 mL compared with low-risk women. Given the low incidence of the outcomes explored, the hemorrhage risk assessment works moderately well to identify patients at risk for peripartum morbidity. Key Points

Validation of a risk screening tool for pediatric type 1 diabetes patients: a predictor of increased acute health care utilization

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (10) ◽  
pp. 1155-1162
Author(s):  
Bethany A. Glick ◽  
K. Ming Chan Hong ◽  
Don Buckingham ◽  
Melissa Moore-Clingenpeel ◽  
Ann Salvator ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Diabetes Diagnosis ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Acute Health Care

Abstract Background Both psychosocial and socioeconomic risk factors contribute to poor glycemic control (GC). Previous research has identified that diabetes care behaviors are generally ‘set’ by late childhood, further highlighting the importance of psychosocial screening and intervention in the early course of disease management. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether this brief risk assessment tool is associated with GC and acute health care (HC) utilization, and to evaluate the discriminatory utility of the tool for predicting poor outcomes. Methods This was a retrospective cohort design in which we compared risk assessment scores with health outcomes at 6, 12, and 18 months after new-onset type 1 diabetes diagnosis for 158 patients between 2015 and 2017. The two primary outcome variables were GC and acute HC utilization. Results Our data demonstrate that the greatest utility of the tool is for predicting increased acute HC utilization. It was most useful in differentiating between patients with vs. without any acute HC utilization, with excellent discriminatory ability (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.93), sensitivity (90%), and specificity (97%). Conclusions Knowledge of the risk category in addition to identification of individual risk factors within each domain allows for not only clear treatment pathways but also individualized interventions. The risk assessment tool was less effective at differentiating patients with poor GC; however, the tool did have high specificity (83%) for predicting poor GC at 18 months which suggests that the tool may also be useful for predicting patients at risk for poor GC.

scholarly journals Current Practice of Hospital Acquired Thrombosis (HAT) Prevention in an Acute Hospital (a single centre cross sectional study)

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4459-4459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Muhammad Irfan Khan ◽  
Catriona O'Leary ◽  
Mary Ann Hayes ◽  
Patricia O'Flynn ◽  
Pauline Suzanne Chappell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Drug Prescription ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tool ◽  
Risk Category ◽  
High Risk Category

Abstract Background Evidence based consensus guidelines for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention are broadly accepted to be effective and safe for more than three decades (Clagett GP et al, 1992). However VTE continues to be associated with a major global burden of disease with 3.9 million cases of HAT during one year among 1.1 billion citizens of high income countries (Jha AK et al, 2013). Therefore prevention is the key to reduce death and disability resulting from VTE (Kahn S et al, Gould MK et al & Falck-Yitter Y et al, 2012). Ireland like many other countries has yet to implement a mandatory risk assessment tool and thromboprophylaxis (TP) policy nationally. Aims The aim of this study was to calculate the proportion of inpatients who had a VTE risk assessment performed and received appropriate TP in a large tertiary referral hospital. This information will be vital for baseline data for implementation of a new national policy for prevention of HAT. Methods This audit was performed at Cork University Hospital on 4 pre specified days between November 2014 to February 2015. All adult inpatients (Medical and Surgical) excluding maternity and psychiatric were included. Patients on therapeutic anticoagulation were also excluded. The patients' medical chart and drug prescription chart were reviewed to determine whether or not a VTE risk assessment was documented for each patient and if they had received appropriate TP. If no risk assessment had been performed, trained researchers applied the National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines 92 (Jan 2010) for VTE risk assessment and prevention. Following the risk assessment patients were divided into three categories, high risk of VTE with low risk of bleeding; high risk of VTE with significant risk of bleeding and low risk of VTE. From this the proportion of patients in each group that received appropriate TP were calculated. Results A total of 1019 patients were enrolled the majority were medical patients 63.5% (n=648). The mean age of patients was 69 years. Females accounted for 52% of patients. Average length of hospitalisation for each patient at the time of the audit was 6 days (range 1-664 days). Overall, a formal TP risk assessment was documented in only 24% (n=244) of all charts reviewed however TP was prescribed in 43.2% (n=441) of patients. See table.Table 1.High Risk of VTE low risk of bleedingHigh risk of VTE significant risk of bleedingLow risk of VTENo. of pts80.3% (n=819)16.6% (n=170)2.9% (n=30)VTE risk assessment documented21.9% (n=180)28.2% (n=55)30% (n=9)Received TP46.3% (n=380)28.8% (n=49)40% (n=12) Within the high risk category patients, 64.3% (n=526) medical. TP was only administered to 46.3% (n=380) of patients in the high risk category. This was almost evenly distributed between surgical 50.1% (n=147) and medical 43.4% (n=233) patients. Conclusion This audit was done as the initial step to develop a national policy to prevent HAT. As suspected, this audit highlights that a large proportion of hospitalised patients, both surgical and medical, continue to be at high risk for VTE despite the availability of preventative measures. There is clear illustration of under prescription of safe, effective and recommended means of VTE prevention. The current overall figure of less than 50% prescription of VTE thromboprophylaxis in high risk patients is a major patient safety concern. There are numerous recognised international guidelines for prevention of VTE, and an efficient method to implement these guidelines needs to be developed. Beyond developing national guidelines for TP, we need a co-ordinated approach to implement and monitor compliance with guidelines. Once the preliminary results of this audit were available to us in March 2015, urgent measures were taken to reduce the identified risk such as the establishment of a Hospital Thrombosis Group which developed a user friendly VTE risk assessment tool and TP policy. The VTE risk assessment tool was incorporated into the patients drug prescription chart and included a pre printed prescription for TP. It is now mandatory for the all patients to have a VTE risk assessment tool and TP prescribed if appropriate within 24hrs of admission. This was successfully piloted for four weeks in the acute medical assessment unit and is now incorporated into each patients drug chart throughout the hospital. This audit will be replicated in 6 months from introduction of this initiative, with an aim of >90% compliance. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document