Outcome prediction in dogs admitted through the emergency room: Accuracy of staff prediction and comparison with an illness severity stratification system for hospitalized dogs
Alice Le Gal DVM, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC, Dominic Martin Barfield BSc, BVSc, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC, Roseanne Helen Wignall RVN, Simon David Cook BSc, BVSc, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC
{"title":"Outcome prediction in dogs admitted through the emergency room: Accuracy of staff prediction and comparison with an illness severity stratification system for hospitalized dogs","authors":"Alice Le Gal DVM, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC, Dominic Martin Barfield BSc, BVSc, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC, Roseanne Helen Wignall RVN, Simon David Cook BSc, BVSc, MVetMed, DACVECC, DECVECC","doi":"10.1111/vec.13350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To determine whether emergency staff and students can predict patient outcome within 24 hours of admission, comparing the accuracy of clinician prognostication with outcome prediction by Acute Patient Physiologic and Laboratory Evaluation (APPLE)<sub>fast</sub> scoring and identifying whether experience or mood would be associated with accuracy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Prospective observational study between April 2020 and March 2021.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>University teaching hospital.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Animals</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred and sixty-one dogs admitted through an Emergency Service were assessed. Where data were available, an APPLE<sub>fast</sub> score was calculated per patient. An APPLE<sub>fast</sub> score of >25 was deemed a predictor for mortality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Interventions</h3>\n \n <p>None.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Measurements and Main Results</h3>\n \n <p>Emergency staff and students were asked to complete surveys about dogs admitted to the emergency room. All clinicopathological data were available for review, and the animals were available for examination. Data collected included opinions on whether the patient would be discharged from hospital, a mood score, position, and experience in Emergency and Critical Care. One-hundred and twenty-five dogs (77.6%) were discharged; 36 dogs (22.4%) died or were euthanized. Two hundred and sixty-six responses were obtained; 202 responses (75.9%) predicted the correct outcome. Students, interns, residents, faculty, and nurses predicted the correct outcome in 81.4%, 58.3%, 83.3%, 82.1%, and 65.5% of cases, respectively. Of 64 incorrect predictions, 43 (67.2%) predicted death in hospital. APPLE<sub>fast</sub> scores were obtained in 121 cases, predicting the correct outcome in 83 cases (68.6%). Of 38 cases in which APPLE<sub>fast</sub> was incorrect, 27 (71.1%) were dogs surviving to discharge. Mean APPLE<sub>fast</sub> score was 22.9 (± 6.2). There was no difference in outcome prediction accuracy between staff and APPLE<sub>fast</sub> scores (<i>P</i> = 0.13). Neither experience nor mood score was associated with outcome prediction ability (<i>P</i> = 0.55 and <i>P</i> = 0.74, respectively).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Outcome prediction accuracy by staff is not significantly different to APPLE<sub>fast</sub> scoring where a cutoff of >25 is used to predict mortality. When predictions were incorrect, they often predicted nonsurvival.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17603,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care","volume":"34 1","pages":"69-75"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/vec.13350","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/vec.13350","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To determine whether emergency staff and students can predict patient outcome within 24 hours of admission, comparing the accuracy of clinician prognostication with outcome prediction by Acute Patient Physiologic and Laboratory Evaluation (APPLE)fast scoring and identifying whether experience or mood would be associated with accuracy.
Design
Prospective observational study between April 2020 and March 2021.
Setting
University teaching hospital.
Animals
One hundred and sixty-one dogs admitted through an Emergency Service were assessed. Where data were available, an APPLEfast score was calculated per patient. An APPLEfast score of >25 was deemed a predictor for mortality.
Interventions
None.
Measurements and Main Results
Emergency staff and students were asked to complete surveys about dogs admitted to the emergency room. All clinicopathological data were available for review, and the animals were available for examination. Data collected included opinions on whether the patient would be discharged from hospital, a mood score, position, and experience in Emergency and Critical Care. One-hundred and twenty-five dogs (77.6%) were discharged; 36 dogs (22.4%) died or were euthanized. Two hundred and sixty-six responses were obtained; 202 responses (75.9%) predicted the correct outcome. Students, interns, residents, faculty, and nurses predicted the correct outcome in 81.4%, 58.3%, 83.3%, 82.1%, and 65.5% of cases, respectively. Of 64 incorrect predictions, 43 (67.2%) predicted death in hospital. APPLEfast scores were obtained in 121 cases, predicting the correct outcome in 83 cases (68.6%). Of 38 cases in which APPLEfast was incorrect, 27 (71.1%) were dogs surviving to discharge. Mean APPLEfast score was 22.9 (± 6.2). There was no difference in outcome prediction accuracy between staff and APPLEfast scores (P = 0.13). Neither experience nor mood score was associated with outcome prediction ability (P = 0.55 and P = 0.74, respectively).
Conclusions
Outcome prediction accuracy by staff is not significantly different to APPLEfast scoring where a cutoff of >25 is used to predict mortality. When predictions were incorrect, they often predicted nonsurvival.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care’s primary aim is to advance the international clinical standard of care for emergency/critical care patients of all species. The journal’s content is relevant to specialist and non-specialist veterinarians practicing emergency/critical care medicine. The journal achieves it aims by publishing descriptions of unique presentation or management; retrospective and prospective evaluations of prognosis, novel diagnosis, or therapy; translational basic science studies with clinical relevance; in depth reviews of pertinent topics; topical news and letters; and regular themed issues.
The journal is the official publication of the Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Society, the American College of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care, the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Society, and the European College of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care. It is a bimonthly publication with international impact and adheres to currently accepted ethical standards.