Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes the availability of core parameters for Early Warning Scores (EWS), evaluates the ability of selected EWS to identify patients at risk of death or other adverse outcome and describes the burden of triggering that front-line staff would experience if implemented. DESIGN: Longitudinal observational cohort study. SETTING: District General Hospital Monaragala. PARTICIPANTS: All adult (age >17 years) admitted patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Existing physiological parameters, adverse outcomes and survival status at hospital discharge were extracted daily from existing paper records for all patients over an 8-month period. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Discrimination for selected aggregate weighted track and trigger systems (AWTTS) was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve.Performance of EWS are further evaluated at time points during admission and across diagnostic groups. The burden of trigger to correctly identify patients who died was evaluated using positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Of the 16 386 patients included, 502 (3.06%) had one or more adverse outcomes (cardiac arrests, unplanned intensive care unit admissions and transfers). Availability of physiological parameters on admission ranged from 90.97% (95% CI 90.52% to 91.40%) for heart rate to 23.94% (95% CI 23.29% to 24.60%) for oxygen saturation. Ability to discriminate death on admission was less than 0.81 (AUROC) for all selected EWS. Performance of the best performing of the EWS varied depending on admission diagnosis, and was diminished at 24 hours prior to event. PPV was low (10.44%). CONCLUSION: There is limited observation reporting in this setting. Indiscriminate application of EWS to all patients admitted to wards in this setting may result in an unnecessary burden of monitoring and may detract from clinician care of sicker patients. Physiological parameters in combination with diagnosis may have a place when applied on admission to help identify patients for whom increased vital sign monitoring may not be beneficial. Further research is required to understand the priorities and cues that influence monitoring of ward patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02523456.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019387

Type

Journal article

Journal

BMJ Open

Publication Date

27/04/2018

Volume

8

Keywords

aggregate weighted track and trigger systems, early warning scores, low-income and middle-income country, single parameter track and trigger systems, Adult, Cohort Studies, Critical Illness, Developing Countries, Female, Heart Arrest, Hospital Mortality, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Risk Factors