Abstract
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.
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.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 152-165 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Acute Medicine |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 6 Nov 2024 |
Keywords
- Decision tools
- Front-door
- Early discharge
- Decision support