Prognostic accuracy of syncope clinical prediction rules in older adults in the emergency department.
clinical prediction rules
geriatric emergency medicine
older adults
pre‐syncope
prognosis
risk stratification
syncope
Journal
Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open
ISSN: 2688-1152
Titre abrégé: J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101764779
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2022
Oct 2022
Historique:
received:
20
03
2022
revised:
03
07
2022
accepted:
14
07
2022
entrez:
31
10
2022
pubmed:
1
11
2022
medline:
1
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of existing rules (San Francisco Syncope Rule [SFSR], Canadian Syncope Risk Score [CSRS], and FAINT score) in older adults. This is a cohort study of adults aged ≥60 years presenting to an academic emergency department (ED) with syncope or near syncope. We used original criteria for all rules except for the FAINT score, in which N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide was largely missing from the extracted data. Patients were deemed positive for each rule if classified as non-low risk. The primary outcome was the presence of 30-day serious outcome, as defined by syncope research guidelines. Sensitivity and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 404 ED visits (mean age of patients, 75.5 years) were included. Of these, 44 (10.9%) had a 30-day serious outcome, and 24 (5.9%) had incomplete 30-day follow-up. SFSR was positive for 280 of 380 visits with complete follow-up. Its sensitivity and NLR for predicting 30-day serious outcomes were 86.4% (95% CI, 72.0%-94.3%) and 0.53 (95% CI, 0.25-1.15), respectively. The CSRS was positive for 299 of 380 visits (sensitivity was 88.6% [95% CI, 76.4%-95.7%], and NLR was 0.50 [95% CI, 0.22-1.17]). The modified FAI(N)T score was positive for 318 of 380 visits (sensitivity was 90.9% [95% CI, 77.4%-97.0%], and NLR was 0.53 [95% CI, 0.20-1.38]). Existing rules are suboptimal to predict 30-day serious outcomes in older adults presenting with syncope or near syncope to the ED.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36311342
doi: 10.1002/emp2.12820
pii: EMP212820
pmc: PMC9597095
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e12820Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Circulation. 2017 Aug 1;136(5):e60-e122
pubmed: 28280231
Am J Emerg Med. 2015 Aug;33(8):998-1001
pubmed: 25943042
Eur Heart J. 2016 May 14;37(19):1493-8
pubmed: 26242712
CMAJ. 2016 Sep 6;188(12):E289-E298
pubmed: 27378464
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;70(3):338-344.e3
pubmed: 28238497
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Oct 16;147(8):573-7
pubmed: 17938396
N Engl J Med. 2002 Sep 19;347(12):878-85
pubmed: 12239256
Emerg Med Australas. 2020 Oct 13;:
pubmed: 33052034
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Feb;75(2):147-158
pubmed: 31668571
BMJ. 2015 Oct 28;351:h5527
pubmed: 26511519
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Jun;19(6):694-702
pubmed: 22687184
Am J Med. 2014 Nov;127(11):1126.e13-1126.e25
pubmed: 24862309
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jun 1;39(21):1883-1948
pubmed: 29562304
Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Feb;43(2):224-32
pubmed: 14747812
Ann Emerg Med. 2014 Sep;64(3):292-8
pubmed: 24746846
West J Emerg Med. 2018 May;19(3):517-523
pubmed: 29760850
Acad Emerg Med. 2004 Oct;11(10):1029-34
pubmed: 15466144
Emerg Med J. 2021 Sep;38(9):701-706
pubmed: 34039646
JAMA Intern Med. 2020 May 1;180(5):737-744
pubmed: 32202605
CMAJ. 2011 Oct 18;183(15):E1116-26
pubmed: 21948723
Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Oct;56(4):362-373.e1
pubmed: 20868906