Objective: To determine whether front-door discharge decision tools operate at different mortality thresholds.
Methods: Three databases searched, for studies testing, deriving or validating front-door risk prediction tools or discharge decision aids, with defined discharge ‘cut-off’, reporting mortality or readmission rates. Studies supporting tools’ inclusion in national guidelines were also included.
Results: Twenty-four studies were included, frequently for acute chest pain. Mortality rates among those discharged based on tools 0-1.7%. Eight studies reported readmission rates, 0-8% among those discharged early or deemed low-risk.
Conclusion: Although mortality rates were lower for those deemed low-risk by decision aids than those admitted or control groups, readmission rates tended to be higher among low-risk or discharged patients, than among control group or admitted patients.
Do tools aimed at avoiding hospital admission operate at different mortality thresholds?A systematic review
6th November 2024
PMID: 39513264
| Authors | Affiliations |
|---|---|
| Ciara Harris | Warwick Applied Health, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham |
| Agnieszka Ignatowicz | Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham |
| Thomas Knight | Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham |
| Brian Willis | Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham |
| Daniel Lasserson | Warwick Applied Health, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Division of Acute General Medicine, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust |
Do tools aimed at avoiding hospital admission operate at different mortality thresholds?A systematic review
Cite this article as:
Harris C, Ignatowicz A, Knight T, Willis B, Lasserson D. Do tools aimed at avoiding hospital admission operate at different mortality thresholds? A systematic review. Acute Med. 2024;23(3):152-165. doi: 10.52964/AMJA.0990. PMID: 39513264.
