Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2024 Dec;50(12):842-848. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2024.08.003. Epub 2024 Aug 10.
Determining which patients benefit from a serious illness conversation (SIC) is challenging. The authors sought to determine whether Epic's Risk of Readmission Score (RRS), could be combined with a simple, validated, one-question mortality prognostic screen (the surprise question: Would you be surprised if the patient died in the next 12 months?) to identify hospitalized patients with SIC needs.
In this retrospective study, the authors randomly selected encounters for patients ≥ 18 years of age to a general medicine service from January 2019 to October 2021 who had an RRS > 28%. Two adjudicators independently performed chart reviews for each encounter to answer the surprise question to create two distinct prognostic groups (yes vs. no). Fisher's exact test was used to assess for statistically significant differences in standardized documentation of SICs between groups.
Out of 2,879 encounters, 202 patient encounters were randomly selected. Adjudicators answered "no" to the surprise question for 156 (77.2%) patients. Patients for whom adjudicators answered "no" were generally older with higher comorbidity and more often had standardized documentation of a SIC (14 [9.0%] vs. 0.[0.0%], p = 0.042) compared to patients for whom adjudicators answered "yes."
Approximately three quarters of patients with a high RRS were predicted to have a lifespan of less than a year. Although these patients were significantly more likely to have a SIC, rates of SICs were extremely low. Combining available electronic health record (EHR) data with a simple one-question screening tool may help identify hospitalized patients who require a SIC in quality improvement initiatives.
确定哪些患者需要进行重病沟通(SIC)具有挑战性。作者试图确定 Epic 的再入院风险评分(RRS)是否可以与一个简单的、经过验证的、一个问题的死亡率预测筛选工具(意外问题:如果患者在未来 12 个月内死亡,您会感到惊讶吗?)相结合,以识别需要进行 SIC 的住院患者。
在这项回顾性研究中,作者从 2019 年 1 月至 2021 年 10 月随机选择了接受一般医学服务的年龄≥18 岁的患者的就诊记录,这些患者的 RRS >28%。两名裁判独立对每个就诊记录进行了图表审查,以回答意外问题,从而创建了两个不同的预后组(是与否)。Fisher 精确检验用于评估两组之间 SIC 标准化记录的统计学显著差异。
在 2879 次就诊中,随机选择了 202 次就诊记录。对于 156 名(77.2%)患者,裁判回答“否”。与回答“是”的患者相比,回答“否”的患者通常年龄更大,合并症更多,并且更有可能进行 SIC 的标准化记录(14 [9.0%] vs. 0 [0.0%],p=0.042)。
大约四分之三 RRS 较高的患者预计寿命不足一年。尽管这些患者更有可能进行 SIC,但 SIC 的发生率极低。在质量改进计划中,将可用的电子健康记录(EHR)数据与简单的单问题筛选工具相结合,可能有助于识别需要进行 SIC 的住院患者。