Key result
~83% of discharge-eligible low-risk PE patients remain hospitalized, suggesting home treatment is underutilized.
Why the study?
Early discharge of low-risk pulmonary embolism patients with oral anticoagulation has not gained widespread adoption despite potential benefits.
Observational (n=138)
No
Early discharge for low-risk pulmonary embolism patients is significantly underutilized in clinical practice, highlighting a need for quality improvement measures to increase adoption.
Early discharge for low-risk PE remains underutilized; this cohort study leaves open whether quality initiatives can safely increase adoption.
Patients with pulmonary embolus (PE) can be stratified into low, intermediate, and high risk based on such factors as hemodynamics and the status of the right ventricle. Low risk patients who meet appropriate criteria can potentially be discharged home with oral anticoagulation, avoiding unnecessary hospitalization and associated complications and costs. However, limited data suggest early discharge of low-risk patients has not gained widespread traction. This retrospective study reviewed 138 patients seen in a high-volume emergency department (ED), 29 of whom were considered low-risk. Of these, 24 (82.7%) were still admitted to the hospital despite meeting appropriate criteria for early discharge. This suggests early discharge of low-risk PE patients is underutilized. A variety of quality improvement measures can be implemented to increase adoption of this approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nitol et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Pulmonary embolism (n=138). Low-risk pulmonary embolism was evaluated on Hospital admission despite meeting criteria for early discharge. Among 29 low-risk pulmonary embolism patients meeting criteria for early discharge, 82.7% were still admitted to the hospital, suggesting home treatment is underutilized.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: