Reasons why emergency department providers do not rely on the pneumonia severity index to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with pneumonia.

Details

Ressource 1Download: serval:BIB_0A7700F6A845.P001 (212.94 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: author
License: Not specified
It was possible to publish this article open access thanks to a Swiss National Licence with the publisher.
Serval ID
serval:BIB_0A7700F6A845
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Reasons why emergency department providers do not rely on the pneumonia severity index to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with pneumonia.
Journal
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Author(s)
Aujesky D., McCausland J.B., Whittle J., Obrosky D.S., Yealy D.M., Fine M.J.
ISSN
1537-6591[electronic]
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2009
Volume
49
Number
10
Pages
e100-e108
Language
english
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many emergency department (ED) providers do not follow guideline recommendations for the use of the pneumonia severity index (PSI) to determine the initial site of treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We identified the reasons why ED providers hospitalize low-risk patients or manage higher-risk patients as outpatients. METHODS: As a part of a trial to implement a PSI-based guideline for the initial site of treatment of patients with CAP, we analyzed data for patients managed at 12 EDs allocated to a high-intensity guideline implementation strategy study arm. The guideline recommended outpatient care for low-risk patients (nonhypoxemic patients with a PSI risk classification of I, II, or III) and hospitalization for higher-risk patients (hypoxemic patients or patients with a PSI risk classification of IV or V). We asked providers who made guideline-discordant decisions on site of treatment to detail the reasons for nonadherence to guideline recommendations. RESULTS: There were 1,306 patients with CAP (689 low-risk patients and 617 higher-risk patients). Among these patients, physicians admitted 258 (37.4%) of 689 low-risk patients and treated 20 (3.2%) of 617 higher-risk patients as outpatients. The most commonly reported reasons for admitting low-risk patients were the presence of a comorbid illness (178 [71.5%] of 249 patients); a laboratory value, vital sign, or symptom that precluded ED discharge (73 patients [29.3%]); or a recommendation from a primary care or a consulting physician (48 patients [19.3%]). Higher-risk patients were most often treated as outpatients because of a recommendation by a primary care or consulting physician (6 [40.0%] of 15 patients). CONCLUSION: ED providers hospitalize many low-risk patients with CAP, most frequently for a comorbid illness. Although higher-risk patients are infrequently treated as outpatients, this decision is often based on the request of an involved physician.
Keywords
Community-Acquired Pneumonia, Low-Risk Patients, Research Team Cohort, Prediction Rule, Admission Decision, Clinical Judgment, Randomized-Trial, Hospitalization, Outcomes, Care
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
11/11/2009 13:12
Last modification date
25/09/2019 7:08
Usage data