{"title":"心源性休克患者姑息治疗的应用:对2020年全国住院患者样本数据库的回顾性分析","authors":"Akriti Agrawal, Adishwar Rao, Ishan Gupta, Dhruv Kumar, Saahith Garg, Ashish Shrivastava, Arnav Garyali, Arun Dontaraju, Abhiram Gannamaneni, Rishi Panjala, Srikar Yeruva, Sabiha Armin, Alisha Young, Astrid Grouls","doi":"10.1089/jpm.2024.0116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Cardiogenic shock (CS) is one of the leading causes of death in patients with myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and congestive heart failure. The utilization patterns of specialist palliative care (PC) consultation in these patients are currently unknown. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To determine the utilization of PC in patients with CS and the overall comorbidities of that population. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Review of the 2020 National Inpatient Sample identified 6,471,165 hospitalizations of which 38,531 patients were hospitalized with CS via International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10 CM) code R57.0. Demographics and details of hospitalization were compared for patients who received PC evaluation (<i>N</i> = 8457) and those who did not (<i>N</i> = 30,074) as identified via ICD-10 CM code Z51.5. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients who received PC evaluation were older (≥65 years: 69.01% vs. 55.04%, <i>p</i> < 0.001), had shorter hospital stays (<14 days: 78.92% vs. 70.35% patients, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and higher in-hospital mortality (65.80% vs. 24.23%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (≥4, 55.22% vs. 48.09%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Furthermore, the patients who received PC had significantly higher odds of death than those who did not (adjusted odds ratio = 6, <i>p</i> < 0.0001). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Despite high mortality rates, specialist PC is not routinely involved in the care of those who die with CS, although does appear to be utilized among those most likely to die. This suggests preferential utilization of specialist PC for terminal patients; however, further research will be helpful to better understand current consult practices and increase PC utilization for this highly morbid population.</p>","PeriodicalId":16656,"journal":{"name":"Journal of palliative medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utilization of Palliative Care in Cardiogenic Shock Patients: A Retrospective Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample Database, 2020.\",\"authors\":\"Akriti Agrawal, Adishwar Rao, Ishan Gupta, Dhruv Kumar, Saahith Garg, Ashish Shrivastava, Arnav Garyali, Arun Dontaraju, Abhiram Gannamaneni, Rishi Panjala, Srikar Yeruva, Sabiha Armin, Alisha Young, Astrid Grouls\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/jpm.2024.0116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Cardiogenic shock (CS) is one of the leading causes of death in patients with myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and congestive heart failure. The utilization patterns of specialist palliative care (PC) consultation in these patients are currently unknown. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To determine the utilization of PC in patients with CS and the overall comorbidities of that population. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Review of the 2020 National Inpatient Sample identified 6,471,165 hospitalizations of which 38,531 patients were hospitalized with CS via International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10 CM) code R57.0. Demographics and details of hospitalization were compared for patients who received PC evaluation (<i>N</i> = 8457) and those who did not (<i>N</i> = 30,074) as identified via ICD-10 CM code Z51.5. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients who received PC evaluation were older (≥65 years: 69.01% vs. 55.04%, <i>p</i> < 0.001), had shorter hospital stays (<14 days: 78.92% vs. 70.35% patients, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and higher in-hospital mortality (65.80% vs. 24.23%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (≥4, 55.22% vs. 48.09%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Furthermore, the patients who received PC had significantly higher odds of death than those who did not (adjusted odds ratio = 6, <i>p</i> < 0.0001). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Despite high mortality rates, specialist PC is not routinely involved in the care of those who die with CS, although does appear to be utilized among those most likely to die. This suggests preferential utilization of specialist PC for terminal patients; however, further research will be helpful to better understand current consult practices and increase PC utilization for this highly morbid population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of palliative medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of palliative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2024.0116\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of palliative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2024.0116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Utilization of Palliative Care in Cardiogenic Shock Patients: A Retrospective Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample Database, 2020.
Background: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is one of the leading causes of death in patients with myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and congestive heart failure. The utilization patterns of specialist palliative care (PC) consultation in these patients are currently unknown. Objectives: To determine the utilization of PC in patients with CS and the overall comorbidities of that population. Methods: Review of the 2020 National Inpatient Sample identified 6,471,165 hospitalizations of which 38,531 patients were hospitalized with CS via International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10 CM) code R57.0. Demographics and details of hospitalization were compared for patients who received PC evaluation (N = 8457) and those who did not (N = 30,074) as identified via ICD-10 CM code Z51.5. Results: Patients who received PC evaluation were older (≥65 years: 69.01% vs. 55.04%, p < 0.001), had shorter hospital stays (<14 days: 78.92% vs. 70.35% patients, p < 0.001), and higher in-hospital mortality (65.80% vs. 24.23%, p < 0.001) with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (≥4, 55.22% vs. 48.09%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the patients who received PC had significantly higher odds of death than those who did not (adjusted odds ratio = 6, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Despite high mortality rates, specialist PC is not routinely involved in the care of those who die with CS, although does appear to be utilized among those most likely to die. This suggests preferential utilization of specialist PC for terminal patients; however, further research will be helpful to better understand current consult practices and increase PC utilization for this highly morbid population.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Palliative Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed journal covering medical, psychosocial, policy, and legal issues in end-of-life care and relief of suffering for patients with intractable pain. The Journal presents essential information for professionals in hospice/palliative medicine, focusing on improving quality of life for patients and their families, and the latest developments in drug and non-drug treatments.
The companion biweekly eNewsletter, Briefings in Palliative Medicine, delivers the latest breaking news and information to keep clinicians and health care providers continuously updated.