Outcome prediction in dogs admitted through the emergency room: Accuracy of staff prediction and comparison with an illness severity stratification system for hospitalized dogs

Author:

Le Gal Alice1ORCID,Barfield Dominic Martin1,Wignall Roseanne Helen1,Cook Simon David1

Affiliation:

1. Section of Emergency and Critical Care, Department of Clinical Science and Services The Royal Veterinary College Hatfield UK

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo 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.DesignProspective observational study between April 2020 and March 2021.SettingUniversity teaching hospital.AnimalsOne 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.InterventionsNone.Measurements and Main ResultsEmergency 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).ConclusionsOutcome 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.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Veterinary

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3