Key result
Between 33.7% and 49.7% of patients admitted for pulmonary embolism were retrospectively classified as low risk by HESTIA and PESI scores, respectively, suggesting they qualified for outpatient management.
Why the study?
The authors sought to investigate the appropriateness of pulmonary embolism admissions to their institution based on risk stratification recommendations from the PESI and HESTIA scores.
Observational (n=175)
No
A significant proportion (33.7%-49.7%) of patients admitted for pulmonary embolism in a community hospital were low-risk based on HESTIA and PESI scores and could have been safely managed as outpatients, highlighting an underutilization of validated risk scores.
PESI/HESTIA may aid outpatient PE selection; leaves open need for randomized outcome confirmation.
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a diagnosis on the broader spectrum of venous thromboembolic (VTE) disease. The diagnostic key for clinicians is detecting which patients have a "high risk" of complications or mortality and who are in the "low-risk" population. The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and HESTIA scores are validated risk stratification tools to determine if patients diagnosed with PE can be successfully managed in the outpatient versus inpatient setting. We aimed to investigate the appropriateness of PE admissions to our institution based on the risk stratification recommendations from PESI and HESTIA scores. We retrospectively identified 175 patients admitted with a diagnosis of PE over one year at our hospital. Baseline demographics, length of admission, and admitting diagnoses were collected for all patients included in this study. PESI and HESTIA scores were then calculated for all included patients. The average PESI score was 91.65 (95% confidence interval: 86.33, 96.97). There were 87 patients (49.7%) that had a low or very low PESI score of fewer than 85 points. Fifty-seven patients (33.7%) presented with a HESTIA score of 0. The risk stratification score indicates these patients as low risk, and appropriate for outpatient management. However, they were instead admitted to the hospital which contributes to increased costs, risk of adverse events, etc. There were 0 mortalities reported for patients in the "low or very low risk" groups, with four reported mortalities in the "very high risk" groups. In our cohort, 33.7%-49.7% of admissions for PE were risk-stratified as "low risk" and qualified for outpatient management based on HESTIA and PESI risk stratification scores, respectively. The underutilization of validated risk scores upon initial diagnosis of PE may lead to worse outcomes and increased healthcare expenditure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brikho et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Pulmonary Embolism (n=175). Hospital admission for pulmonary embolism was evaluated on Proportion of admitted patients classified as low risk by PESI (<85). Between 33.7% and 49.7% of patients admitted for pulmonary embolism were retrospectively classified as low risk by HESTIA and PESI scores, respectively, suggesting they qualified for outpatient management.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: