Randomized clinical trial of an emergency department observation syncope protocol versus routine inpatient admission

Diagnostic and societal impact of implementing the syncope guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (SYNERGY study)

BACKGROUND

Syncope management is fraught with unnecessary tests and frequent failure to establish a diagnosis. We evaluated the potential of implementing the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Syncope Guidelines regarding diagnostic yield, accuracy and costs.

METHODS

A multicentre pre-post study in five Dutch hospitals comparing two groups of syncope patients visiting the emergency department: one before intervention (usual care; from March 2017 to February 2019) and one afterwards (from October 2017 to September 2019). The intervention consisted of the simultaneous implementation of the ESC Syncope Guidelines with quick referral routes to a syncope unit when indicated. The primary objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy using logistic regression analysis accounting for the study site. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic yield, syncope-related healthcare and societal costs. One-year follow-up data were used to define a gold standard reference diagnosis by applying ESC criteria or, if not possible, evaluation by an expert committee. We determined the accuracy by comparing the treating physician's diagnosis with the reference diagnosis.

RESULTS

We included 521 patients (usual care, n = 275; syncope guidelines intervention, n = 246). The syncope guidelines intervention resulted in a higher diagnostic accuracy in the syncope guidelines group than in the usual care group (86% vs.69%; risk ratio 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23) and a higher diagnostic yield (89% vs. 76%, 95% CI of the difference 6 to 19%). Syncope-related healthcare costs did not differ between the groups, yet the syncope guideline implementation resulted in lower total syncope-related societal costs compared to usual care (saving €908 per patient; 95% CI €34 to €1782).

CONCLUSIONS

ESC Syncope Guidelines implementation in the emergency department with quick referral routes to a syncope unit improved diagnostic yield and accuracy and lowered societal costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6268.

Are Short-Stay Units Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

Introduction: Emergency Department (ED) overcrowding is a health, political, and economic problem of concern worldwide. The causes of overcrowding are an aging population, an increase in chronic diseases, a lack of access to primary care, and a lack of resources in communities. Overcrowding has been associated with an increased risk of mortality. The establishment of a Short Stay Unit (SSU) for conditions that cannot be treated at home but require treatment and hospitalization for up to 72 h may be a solution. SSU can significantly reduce hospital length of stay (LOS) for certain conditions but does not appear to be useful for other diseases. Currently, there are no studies addressing the efficacy of SSU in the treatment of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Our study aims to evaluate the efficacy of SSU in reducing the need for hospitalization, LOS, hospital readmission, and mortality in patients with NVUGIB compared with admission to the regular ward. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center observational study. Medical records of patients presenting with NVUGIB to ED between 1 April 2021, and 30 September 2022, were analyzed. We included patients aged >18 years who presented to ED with acute upper gastrointestinal tract blood loss. The test population was divided into two groups: Patients admitted to a normal inpatient ward (control) and patients treated at SSU (intervention). Clinical and medical history data were collected for both groups. The hospital LOS was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were time to endoscopy, number of blood units transfused, readmission to the hospital at 30 days, and in-hospital mortality. Results: The analysis included 120 patients with a mean age of 70 years, 54% of whom were men. Sixty patients were admitted to SSU. Patients admitted to the medical ward had a higher mean age. The Glasgow-Blatchford score, used to assess bleeding risk, mortality, and hospital readmission were similar in the study groups. Multivariate analysis after adjustment for confounders found that the only factor independently associated with shorter LOS was admission to SSU (p < 0.0001). Admission to SSU was also independently and significantly associated with a shorter time to endoscopy (p < 0.001). The only other factor associated with a shorter time to EGDS was creatinine level (p = 0.05), while home treatment with PPI was associated with a longer time to endoscopy. LOS, time to endoscopy, number of patients requiring transfusion, and number of units of blood transfused were significantly lower in patients admitted to SSU than in the control group. Conclusions: The results of the study show that treatment of NVUGIB in SSU can significantly reduce the time required for endoscopy, the hospital LOS, and the number of transfused blood units without increasing mortality and hospital readmission. Treatment of NVUGIB at SSU may therefore help to reduce ED overcrowding but multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these data.

Trauma and syncope: looking beyond the injury

Background

42% of the population experience syncope by the age of 70, accounting for up to 6% of hospital admissions that frequently present as falls. The etiologies of some falls are benign, and others, such as cardiac syncope, are associated with a greater mortality and must be identified.

Methods

This review article aims to bridge the literature gap by providing a comprehensive practice review and critical summary of the current syncope guidance relating to the trauma patient.

Results

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the American College of Cardiology, and European Society of Cardiology published syncope risk stratification guidance. The inclusion of certain high-risk features represented in all three guidelines suggests their significance to identify cardiac syncope including heart failure, abnormal vital signs, syncope during exercise with little to no prodrome, family history of sudden cardiac death, and ECG abnormalities. Of 11 syncope risk stratification scoring systems based on these guidelines, only 2 are externally validated in the emergency department, neither of which are validated for major trauma use. Adherence to thorough history-taking, examination, orthostatic blood pressure recording, and an ECG can diagnose the cause of syncope in up to 50% of patients. ECG findings are 95% to 98% sensitive in the detection of serious adverse outcomes after cardiac syncope and should form part of a standardized syncope trauma assessment. Routine blood testing in trauma is often performed despite evidence that it is neither useful nor cost effective, where the screening of cardiac enzymes and D-dimer rarely influences management.

Discussion

In the absence of a gold-standard clinical test to identify the cause of a syncopal episode, standardized syncope guidelines as described in this review could be incorporated into trauma protocols to analyze high-risk etiologies, improve diagnostic accuracy, reduce unnecessary investigations, and develop an effective and safer management strategy.

Development of a Novel Emergency Department Quality Measure to Reduce Very Low-Risk Syncope Hospitalizations

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Emergency department (ED) evaluations for syncope are common, representing 1.3 million annual US visits and $2 billion in related hospitalizations. Despite evidence supporting risk stratification and outpatient management, variation in syncope hospitalization rates persist. We sought to develop a new quality measure for very low-risk adult ED patients with syncope that could be applied to administrative data.

METHODS

We developed this quality measure in 2 phases. First, we used an existing prospective, observational ED patient data set to identify a very low-risk cohort with unexplained syncope using 2 variables: age less than 50 years and no history of heart disease. We then applied this to the 2019 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) to assess its potential effect, assessing for hospital-level factors associated with hospitalization variation.

RESULTS

Of the 8,647 adult patients in the prospective cohort, 3,292 (38%) patients fulfilled these 2 criteria: age less than 50 years and no history of heart disease. Of these, 15 (0.46%) suffered serious adverse events within 30 days. In the NEDS, there were an estimated 566,031 patients meeting these 2 criteria, of whom 15,507 (2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.48% to 3.00%) were hospitalized. We found substantial variation in the hospitalization rates for this very low-risk cohort, with a median rate of 1.7% (range 0% to 100%; interquartile range 0% to 3.9%). Factors associated with increased hospitalization rates included a yearly ED volume of more than 80,000 (odds ratio [OR] 3.14; 95% CI 2.02 to 4.89) and metropolitan teaching status (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.81).

CONCLUSION

In summary, our novel syncope quality measure can assess variation in low-value hospitalizations for unexplained syncope. The application of this measure could improve the value of syncope care.

Risk stratification of syncope: Current syncope guidelines and beyond

Syncope is an alarming event carrying the possibility of serious outcomes, including sudden cardiac death (SCD). Therefore, immediate risk stratification should be applied whenever syncope occurs, especially in the Emergency Department, where most dramatic presentations occur. It has long been known that short- and long-term syncope prognosis is affected not only by its mechanism but also by presence of concomitant conditions, especially cardiovascular disease. Over the last two decades, several syncope prediction tools have been developed to refine patient stratification and triage patients who need expert in-hospital care from those who may receive nonurgent expert care in the community. However, despite promising results, prognostic tools for syncope remain challenging and often poorly effective. Current European Society of Cardiology syncope guidelines recommend an initial syncope workup based on detailed patient's history, physical examination supine and standing blood pressure, resting ECG, and laboratory tests, including cardiac biomarkers, where appropriate. Subsequent risk stratification based on screening of features aims to identify three groups: high-, intermediate- and low-risk. The first should immediately be hospitalized and appropriately investigated; intermediate group, with recurrent or medium-risk events, requires systematic evaluation by syncope experts; low-risk group, sporadic reflex syncope, merits education about its benign nature, and discharge. Thus, initial syncope risk stratification is crucial as it determines how and by whom syncope patients are managed. This review summarizes the crucial elements of syncope risk stratification, pros and cons of proposed risk evaluation scores, major challenges in initial syncope management, and how risk stratification impacts management of high-risk/recurrent syncope.

Bifascicular block in unexplained syncope is underrecognized and under-evaluated: A single-center audit of ESC guidelines adherence

Background

The presence of bifascicular block on electrocardiography suggests that otherwise-unexplained syncope may be due to complete heart block. European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends investigating it with electrophysiology study (EPS). PPM is indicated if high-degree atrioventricular block is inducible. Long term rhythm monitoring with implantable loop recorder (ILR) is recommended if EPS is negative. We evaluated adherence to these guidelines.

Methods

This is a single-center retrospective audit of adult patients with bifascicular block hospitalized for unexplained syncope between January 2018 and August 2019 under general medicine service. Patients with an alternative explanation for syncope were excluded. Guideline adherence was assessed by formal cardiology consult and whether EPS followed by ILR and/or PPM were offered.

Results

65 out of 580 adult patients (11.2%) admitted to general medicine service for syncope had a bifascicular block; 29 (5%) were identified to have bifascicular block and unexplained syncope. Median age was 77 ±10 years; 9 (31%) were female, and 6 (20.7%) patients had at least one prior hospital visit for syncope at our academic medical center. Cardiology was consulted on 17 (58.6%) patients. Two patients were evaluated by EPS (1 refused) followed by ILR. Overall, 3 out of 29 patients (10.3%) received guideline-directed evaluation during the hospitalization based on ESC guidelines. None of the patients received empiric PPM during the index hospitalization.

Conclusion

Among patients admitted to the general medicine service with unexplained syncope and bifascicular block, a minority (10.3%) underwent guideline-directed evaluation per ESC recommendations. Cardiology was consulted in 58.6% of cases.

Observation unit use among patients with cancer following emergency department visits: Results of a multicenter prospective cohort from CONCERN

PURPOSE

Emergency department (ED) visits by patients with cancer frequently end in hospitalization. As concerns about ED and hospital crowding increase, observation unit care may be an important strategy to deliver safe and efficient treatment for eligible patients. In this investigation, we compared the prevalence and clinical characteristics of cancer patients who received observation unit care with those who were admitted to the hospital from the ED.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with cancer presenting to an ED affiliated with one of 18 hospitals of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergency Research Network (CONCERN) between March 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. We compared patient characteristics with the prevalence of observation unit care usage, hospital admission, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Of 1051 enrolled patients, 596 (56.7%) were admitted as inpatients, and 72 (6.9%) were placed in an observation unit. For patients admitted as inpatients, 23.7% had a length of stay ≤2 days. The conversion rate from observation to inpatient was 17.1% (95% CI 14.6-19.4) among those receiving care in an observation unit. The average observation unit length of stay was 14.7 h. Patient factors associated ED disposition to observation unit care were female gender and low Charlson Comorbidity Index.

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter prospective cohort study, the discrepancy between observation unit care use and short inpatient hospitalization may represent underutilization of this resource and a target for process change.

Syncope Time Frames for Adverse Events after Emergency Department Presentation: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: Knowledge of the incidence and time frames of the adverse events of patients presenting syncope at the ED is essential for developing effective management strategies. The aim of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis of the incidence and time frames of adverse events of syncope patients. Materials and Methods: We combined individual patients’ data from prospective observational studies including adult patients who presented syncope at the ED. We assessed the pooled rate of adverse events at 24 h, 72 h, 7–10 days, 1 month and 1 year after ED evaluation. Results: We included nine studies that enrolled 12,269 patients. The mean age varied between 53 and 73 years, with 42% to 57% females. The pooled rate of adverse events was 5.1% (95% CI 3.4% to 7.7%) at 24 h, 7.0% (95% CI 4.9% to 9.9%) at 72 h, 8.4% (95% CI 6.2% to 11.3%) at 7–10 days, 10.3% (95% CI 7.8% to 13.3%) at 1 month and 21.3% (95% CI 15.8% to 28.0%) at 1 year. The pooled death rate was 0.2% (95% CI 0.1% to 0.5%) at 24 h, 0.3% (95% CI 0.1% to 0.7%) at 72 h, 0.5% (95% CI 0.3% to 0.9%) at 7–10 days, 1% (95% CI 0.6% to 1.7%) at 1 month and 5.9% (95% CI 4.5% to 7.7%) at 1 year. The most common adverse event was arrhythmia, for which its rate was 3.1% (95% CI 2.0% to 4.9%) at 24 h, 4.8% (95% CI 3.5% to 6.7%) at 72 h, 5.8% (95% CI 4.2% to 7.9%) at 7–10 days, 6.9% (95% CI 5.3% to 9.1%) at 1 month and 9.9% (95% CI 5.5% to 17) at 1 year. Ventricular arrhythmia was rare. Conclusions: The risk of death or life-threatening adverse event is rare in patients presenting syncope at the ED. The most common adverse events are brady and supraventricular arrhythmias, which occur during the first 3 days. Prolonged ECG monitoring in the ED in a short stay unit with ECG monitoring facilities may, therefore, be beneficial.

The Changing Role of Chest Pain in the Emergency Department Observation Unit

BACKGROUND

This study objective was to describe changes in the utilization of a protocol-driven emergency department observation unit (EDOU) for chest pain over time.

METHODS

This is a retrospective serial cross-sectional study of data from a clinical data warehouse of a single integrated healthcare system. We estimated long-term trends (2009-2019) in EDOU visits at 4 system hospitals, using monthly proportions as the main outcome, and month of visit as the exposure variable, accounting for age and sex. Rate changes associated with compulsory use of the History, EKG, Age, Risk factors, Troponin (HEART) score in 2016 were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 83,168 EDOU admissions among 1.3 million ED visits during the study interval, with an average admission rate of 5.9% of ED visits. The most common conditions were chest pain (41.2%), transient ischemic attack (7.8%), dehydration (6.3%), syncope (5.8%), and abdominal pain (5.2%). In each hospital, there was a temporal annual decline in the proportion of EDOU visits for chest pain protocols ranging from -7.9% to -2.8%, an average rate of -3.3% per year (95% CI, -4.6% to -2.0%) or a 54% (from 54% to 25%) relative decline in over the 11-year study interval. This decline was significantly steeper in younger middle-aged patients (ages 39-49). The HEART score intervention had a small impact on baseline decline of -3.1% at the 2 intervention hospitals, reducing it by -1.5% (95% CI, -2.2% to -0.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of the EDOU for chest pain decreased over time, with corresponding increases in other conditions. This decline preceded the introduction of the HEART score.

Current best practices in emergency evaluation and management of syncope

ABSTRACT

Syncope is a common medical presentation that can cost the US healthcare system up to $2.4 billion dollars annually. Much of this cost can be mitigated with proper evaluation and management in the urgent care setting, as well as appropriate use of a risk stratification system.

Management of Minor Traumatic Brain Injury in an ED Observation Unit

Introduction

Traumatic intracranial hemorrhages (TIH) have traditionally been managed in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting with neurosurgery consultation and repeat head CT (HCT) for each patient. Recent publications indicate patients with small TIH and normal neurological examinations who are not on anticoagulation do not require ICU-level care, repeat HCT, or neurosurgical consultation. It has been suggested that these patients can be safely discharged home after a short period of observation in emergency department observation units (EDOU) provided their symptoms do not progress.

Methods

This study is a retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of an EDOU protocol for minor traumatic brain injury (mTBI). It was conducted at a Level I trauma center. The protocol was developed by emergency medicine, neurosurgery and trauma surgery and modeled after the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG). All patients were managed by attendings in the ED with discretionary neurosurgery and trauma surgery consultations. Patients were eligible for the mTBI protocol if they met BIG 1 or BIG 2 criteria (no intoxication, no anticoagulation, normal neurological examination, no or non-displaced skull fracture, subdural or intraparenchymal hematoma up to 7 millimeters, trace to localized subarachnoid hemorrhage), and had no other injuries or medical co-morbidities requiring admission. Protocol in the EDOU included routine neurological checks, symptom management, and repeat HCT for progression of symptoms. The EDOU group was compared with historical controls admitted with primary diagnosis of TIH over the 12 months prior to the initiation of the mTBI protocols. Primary outcome was reduction in EDOU length of stay (LOS) as compared to inpatient LOS. Secondary outcomes included rates of neurosurgical consultation, repeat HCT, conversion to inpatient admission, and need for emergent neurosurgical intervention.

Results

There were 169 patients placed on the mTBI protocol between September 1, 2016 and August 31, 2019. The control group consisted of 53 inpatients. Median LOS (interquartile range [IQR]) for EDOU patients was 24.8 (IQR: 18.8 – 29.9) hours compared with a median LOS for the comparison group of 60.2 (IQR: 45.1 – 85.0) hours (P < .001). In the EDOU group 47 (27.8%) patients got a repeat HCT compared with 40 (75.5%) inpatients, and 106 (62.7%) had a neurosurgical consultation compared with 53 (100%) inpatients. Subdural hematoma was the most common type of hemorrhage. It was found in 60 (35.5%) patients, and subarachnoid hemorrhage was found in 56 cases (33.1%). Eleven patients had multicompartment hemorrhage of various classifications. Twelve (7.1%) patients required hospital admission from the EDOU. None of the EDOU patients required emergent neurosurgical intervention.

Conclusion

Patients with minor TIH can be managed in an EDOU using an mTBI protocol and discretionary neurosurgical consults and repeat HCT. This is associated with a significant reduction in length of stay.

The impact of emergency department observation units on a health system

IMPORTANCE

Protocol driven ED observation units (EDOU) have been shown to improve outcomes for patients and payers, however their impact on an entire health system is unknown. Two thirds of US hospitals do not have such units.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of a protocol-driven EDOU on health system length of stay, cost, and resource utilization.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study of observation patients managed over 25 consecutive months in a four-hospital academic health system. Patients were identified using the "admit to observation" order and limited to adult, emergent / urgent, non-obstetric patients. Data was retrieved from a cost accounting database. The primary study exposure was the setting for observation care which was broken into three discrete groups: EDOUs (n = 3), hospital medicine observation units (HMSOU, n = 2), and a non-observation unit (NOU) bed located anywhere in the hospital. Outcomes included observation-to-inpatient admission rate, length of stay (LoS), total direct cost, and inpatient bed days saved. Unadjusted outcomes were compared, and outcomes were adjusted using multiple study variables. LoS and cost were compared using quantile regressions. Inpatient admit rate was compared using logistic regressions.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 48,145 patients who were 57.4% female, 48% Black, 46% White, median age of 58, with some variation in most common diagnoses and payer groups. The median unadjusted outcomes favored EDOU over NOU settings for admission rate (13.1% vs 37.1%), LoS [17.9 vs 35.6 h), and cost ($1279 vs $2022). The adjusted outcomes favored EDOU over NOU settings for admission rates [12.3% (95% CI 9.7-15.3) vs 26.4% (CI 21.3-32.3)], LoS differences [11.1 h (CI 10.6-11.5 h)] and cost differences [$127.5 (CI $105.4 - $149.5)]. Adjusted differences were similar and favored EDOU over HMSOU settings. For the health system, the total adjusted annualized savings of the EDOUs was 10,399 bed days and $1,329,443 in total direct cost per year.

CONCLUSION

Within an academic medical center, EDOUs were associated with improved resource utilization and reduced cost. This represents a significant opportunity for hospitals to improve efficiency and contain costs.

Machine Learning and Syncope Management in the ED: The Future Is Coming

In recent years, machine learning (ML) has been promisingly applied in many fields of clinical medicine, both for diagnosis and prognosis prediction. Aims of this narrative review were to summarize the basic concepts of ML applied to clinical medicine and explore its main applications in the emergency department (ED) setting, with a particular focus on syncope management. Through an extensive literature search in PubMed and Embase, we found increasing evidence suggesting that the use of ML algorithms can improve ED triage, diagnosis, and risk stratification of many diseases. However, the lacks of external validation and reliable diagnostic standards currently limit their implementation in clinical practice. Syncope represents a challenging problem for the emergency physician both because its diagnosis is not supported by specific tests and the available prognostic tools proved to be inefficient. ML algorithms have the potential to overcome these limitations and, in the future, they could support the clinician in managing syncope patients more efficiently. However, at present only few studies have addressed this issue, albeit with encouraging results.

The Impact of a Nurse-Led Syncope Clinic: Experience from a single UK tertiary center

Background

Syncope is a leading cause of hospital admission and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Our Syncope Clinic commenced in 2014 and we sought to evaluate its impact on outcomes (1‐yr mortality and syncope re‐hospitalization) in patients discharged following syncope admission.

Methods

A single‐center study of all consecutive patients discharged with syncope (ICD‐10 R55) between April 2012 and 2017. Patient demographics, comorbidities, hospital stay, syncope re‐hospitalization, and mortality at one‐year were collected. Those subsequently referred and seen in Syncope Clinic were compared with those who were not and predictors of poor outcome were evaluated.

Results

In total 2950 patients were discharged from hospital with syncope (median age: 73years, 51% male) with 1220 (41%) discharged same‐day; after commencement of Syncope Clinic 231were subsequently reviewed here. Overall mortality was 11%, which was lower in the Syncope Clinic group (3% vs 12%, P < .001). Temporal analysis revealed reduced re‐hospitalization following commencement of Syncope Clinic (2% vs 6%, P = .027). Independent predictors of mortality were increasing age (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.03‐1.04), AF (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2‐2.1), HF (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6‐3.0), COPD (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4‐2.7), and CHADS₂ score ≥ 1 (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1,12‐1.87). Syncope Clinic attendance was associated with reduced mortality (HR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1‐0.6).

Conclusions

Syncope patients discharged from hospital had reduced 1yr mortality if seen in subsequent Syncope Clinic. Independent predictors of mortality were COPD, HF, AF, and CHADS₂ ≥1. Prospective randomized trials of Syncope Clinics are warranted.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society Clinical Practice Update on the Assessment and Management of Syncope

Syncope is a symptom that occurs in multiple settings and has a variety of underlying causes, ranging from benign to life threatening. Determining the underlying diagnosis and prognosis can be challenging and often results in an unstructured approach to evaluation, which is ineffective and costly. In this first ever document, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) provides a clinical practice update on the assessment and management of syncope. It highlights similarities and differences between the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society and the 2018 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, draws on new data following a thorough review of medical literature, and takes the best available evidence and clinical experience to provide clinical practice tips. Where appropriate, a focus on a Canadian perspective is emphasized in order to illuminate larger international issues. This document represents the consensus of a Canadian panel comprised of multidisciplinary experts on this topic with a mandate to formulate disease-specific advice. The primary writing panel wrote the document, followed by peer review from the secondary writing panel. The CCS Guidelines Committee reviewed and approved the statement. The practice tips represent the consensus opinion of the primary writing panel authors, endorsed by the CCS. The CCS clinical practice update on the assessment and management of syncope focuses on epidemiology, the initial evaluation including risk stratification and disposition from the emergency department, initial diagnostic work-up, management of vasovagal syncope and orthostatic hypotension, and syncope and driving.

Is our initial evaluation of patients admitted for syncope guideline-directed and cost-effective?

Introduction

Recent American College of Cardiology and European Society of Cardiology guidelines for syncope evaluation help distinguish high-cardiac risk patients from those with low-risk orthostatic and neurogenic syncope. Inpatient evaluation is recommended if at least one high-risk feature is present.

Objective

To assess guideline adherence and its impact on hospitalization in patients who presented with syncope before and after the introduction of guideline-based syncope protocol in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

All adult patients admitted to general medicine from the ED with the primary diagnosis of syncope in the months of October 2016 and October 2018 (before and after the introduction of syncope protocol in 2017). Electronic charts were retrospectively reviewed for high-risk cardiac features and orthostatic blood pressure measurement.

Results

Sixty patients were admitted for syncope in October 2016 (n = 32) and October 2018 (n = 28), out of which 33 (55%) were female and 47 (78.3%) were over age 50. Forty-five patients had at least one high-risk feature. Excluding one patient with an alternate diagnosis at discharge, 14 out of 60 patients (23.3%) admitted for syncope did not have any high-risk feature. Orthostatic blood pressure was measured in 3 patients (5%) in the ED and 27 patients (45%) later in the hospitalization. Six out of eight patients with implanted cardioverter-defibrillator or pacemaker had their devices interrogated. After the introduction of syncope protocol, there was an improvement in the proportion of high-risk patients admitted [68.7% (22/32) in October 2016 vs. 82.1% (23/28) in October 2018].

Conclusion

Utilizing syncope protocol in the ED may improve guideline adherence, direct appropriate disposition, and reduce healthcare expenses.

Predictive Accuracy of Electrocardiographic Monitoring of Patients With Syncope in the Emergency Department: The SyMoNE Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Arrhythmia is one of the most worrisome causes of syncope. Electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring is crucial for the management of non-low-risk patients in the emergency department (ED). However, its diagnostic accuracy and optimal duration are unknown. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ECG monitoring in non-low-risk patients with syncope in the ED.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter observational study included adult patients presenting to the ED after syncope. Patients without an obvious etiology after ED evaluation who were classified by ED physicians as being at non-low risk of adverse events underwent ECG monitoring. We assessed sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic yield (defined as the proportion of patients with true-positive ECG monitoring findings) of ECG monitoring in the identification of 7- and 30-day adverse and arrhythmic events according to monitoring duration.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients included in the study, 29 patients had 7-day serious outcomes. Ten additional patients had serious outcomes at 30 days. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic yield of ECG monitoring in the identification of 7-day adverse events were 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36 to 0.74], 0.93 (95% CI = 0.89 to 0.96), and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.04 to 0.10), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic yield of >12-hour ECG monitoring in the identification of 7-day adverse events were 0.89 (95% CI = 0.65 to 0.99), 0.78 (95% CI = 0.67 to 0.87), and 0.18 (95% CI = 0.12 to 0.28), respectively. Similar results were observed for 30-day adverse events. The median (interquartile range) ECG monitoring time was 6.5 (6 to 15) hours. ECG monitoring findings were positive in 31 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the overall diagnostic accuracy of ECG monitoring is fair, its sensitivity at >12 hours' duration is substantially higher. These results suggest that prolonged (>12 hours) monitoring is a safe alternative to hospital admission in the management of non-low-risk patients with syncope in the ED.

Syncope in the Emergency Department

Syncope is a common presentation to Emergency Departments (EDs). Estimates on the frequency of visits (0.6–1.7%) and subsequent rates of hospitalizations (12–85%) vary according to country. The initial ED evaluation for syncope consists of a detailed history, physical examination and 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). The use of additional diagnostic testing and specialist evaluation should be based on this initial evaluation rather than an unstructured approach of broad-based testing. Risk stratification performed in the ED is important for estimating prognosis, triage decisions and to establish urgency of any further work-up. The primary approach to risk stratification focuses on identifying high- and low-risk predictors. The use of prediction tools may be used to aid in physician decision-making; however, they have not performed better than the clinical judgment of emergency room physicians. Following risk stratification, decision for hospitalization should be based on the seriousness of the underlying cause for syncope or based on high-risk features, or the severity of co-morbidities. For those deemed intermediate risk, access to specialist assessment and related testing may occur in a syncope unit in the emergency department, as an outpatient, or in a less formal care pathway and is highly dependent on the local healthcare system. For syncope patients presenting to the ED, ~0.8% die and 10.3% suffer a non-fatal severe outcome within 30 days.

Electrocardiogram and cardiac testing among patients in the emergency department with seizure versus syncope

Objective

Cardiogenic syncope can present as a seizure. The distinction between seizure disorder and cardiogenic syncope can only be made if one considers the diagnosis. Our main objective was to identify whether patients presenting with a chief complaint (reason for visit) as seizure or syncope received an electrocardiogram in the emergency department across all age groups.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected in the 2010 to 2014 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey comparing patients presenting with a chief complaint of syncope versus seizure to determine likelihood of getting an evaluation for possible life threatening cardiovascular disease. The primary endpoint was receiving an electrocardiogram in the emergency department; secondary endpoint was receiving cardiac biomarkers.

Results

There was a total of 144,094 patient encounters. Of these visits, 1,553 had syncope and 1,470 had seizure (60.3% vs. 44.2% female, 19.9% vs. 29.0% non-white). After adjusting for age, sex, mode of arrival and insurance, patients with syncope were more likely to receive an electrocardiogram compared to patients with seizure (odds ratio, 10.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.52 to 13.84). This was true across all age groups (0 to 18 years, 56% vs. 7.5%; 18 to 44 years, 60% vs. 27%; 45 to 64 years, 82% vs. 41%; ≥65 years, 85% vs. 68%; P<0.01 for all). Car- diac biomarkers were also obtained more frequently in adult patients with syncope patients (18 to 44 years, 17.5% vs. 10.5%; 45 to 64 years, 33.8% vs. 21.4%; ≥65 years, 47.1% vs. 32.3%; P<0.01 for all).

Conclusion

Patients evaluated in the emergency department for syncope received an electrocar- diogram and cardiac biomarkers more frequently than those that had seizure.

The prevalence of unexplained falls and syncope in older adults presenting to an Irish urban emergency department

AIM

There is growing evidence of an overlap between unexplained falls and syncope in older adults. Our aim was to examine the prevalence and associated resource utilization of these conditions in an urban emergency department (ED).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-centre, prospective, observational study was carried out over a 6-month period. Consecutive patients older than 50 years who presented to the ED because of a fall, collapse or syncope were included. Univariate analysis of demographic data is presented as percentages, mean (SD), 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and medians (interquartile range). Logistic regression modelling was used to examine the association between falls and resource utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 561 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria during the study period. Unexplained fallers accounted for 14.3% (n=80; 95% CI: 13.3-15.3) and syncope for 12.7% (n=71; 95% CI: 11.7-13.6) of all fall presentations. Overall, 50% (n=282; 95% CI: 48.20-52.34) of patients required admission to hospital. Patients with syncope [odds ratio (OR)=2.48, 95% CI: 1.45-4.23], and unexplained falls (OR=2.36, 95% CI: 1.37-4.08) were more likely to require admission than those with an explained falls. Unexplained fallers were nearly five times more likely to suffer recurrent falls (OR=4.97, 95% CI: 2.89-8.56).

CONCLUSION

One in four older fallers presenting to ED have symptoms suggestive of syncope or an unexplained fall. There are significant biological consequences of recurrent falls including greater rates of cognitive decline, gait and mobility disturbances, depression and frailty. Recognition that syncope can present as an unexplained fall in older adults is important to ensure that appropriate early modifiable interventions are initiated.

Emergency department management of patients with syncope according to the 2018 ESC guidelines: Main innovations and aspect deserving a further improvement

The approach suggested by the 2018 ESC GL is the main road for achieving the ambitious goal "zero admission for syncope". This document has in fact introduced a clear-cut distinction between syncope associated with a definite diagnosis, which shall be managed according to the underlying condition, and the really undetermined cases, which shall be managed with prognostic stratification. ESC GL also emphasize the pivotal importance of managing patients in facilities such as ED observation syncope units or outpatient syncope clinics, as a safe alternative to admission. Moreover, they provide a table of non-syncopal causes of TLOC to be excluded, indicating the clinical features distinguishing them from syncope, clearly define the indications for additional examinations to be made after the initial evaluation and include a detailed table contains features for stratifying patients as being at high- and low-risk. However, we believe that this approach could be further improved, by especially defining criteria to identify patient neither high nor low risk, to be called at "intermediate-risk", making the prognostic stratification table easier to remember and use, by clarifying the role of laboratory tests to support the clinical judgment and by defining protocol for managing patients ED observation unit.

Clinical Benefit of Hospitalization for Older Adults With Unexplained Syncope: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Many adults with syncope are hospitalized solely for observation and testing. We seek to determine whether hospitalization versus outpatient management for older adults with unexplained syncope is associated with a reduction in postdisposition serious adverse events at 30 days.

METHODS

We performed a propensity score analysis using data from a prospective, observational study of older adults with unexplained syncope or near syncope who presented to 11 emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. We enrolled adults (≥60 years) who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED. Clinical and laboratory data were collected on all patients. The primary outcome was rate of post-ED serious adverse events at 30 days.

RESULTS

We enrolled 2,492 older adults with syncope and no serious ED diagnosis from April 2013 to September 2016. Mean age was 73 years (SD 8.9 years), and 51% were women. The incidence of serious adverse events within 30 days after the index visit was 7.4% for hospitalized patients and 3.19% for discharged patients, representing an unadjusted difference of 4.2% (95% confidence interval 2.38% to 6.02%). After propensity score matching on risk of hospitalization, there was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events at 30 days between the hospitalized group (4.89%) and the discharged group (2.82%) (risk difference 2.07%; 95% confidence interval -0.24% to 4.38%).

CONCLUSION

In our propensity-matched sample of older adults with unexplained syncope, for those with clinical characteristics similar to that of the discharged cohort, hospitalization was not associated with improvement in 30-day serious adverse event rates.

Using the Boston Syncope Observation Management Pathway to Reduce Hospital Admission and Adverse Outcomes

Introduction

In an age of increasing scrutiny of each hospital admission, emergency department (ED) observation has been identified as a low-cost alternative. Prior studies have shown admission rates for syncope in the United States to be as high as 70%. However, the safety and utility of substituting ED observation unit (EDOU) syncope management has not been well studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of EDOU for the management of patients presenting to the ED with syncope and its efficacy in reducing hospital admissions.

Methods

This was a prospective before-and-after cohort study of consecutive patients presenting with syncope who were seen in an urban ED and were either admitted to the hospital, discharged, or placed in the EDOU. We first performed an observation study of syncope management and then implemented an ED observation-based management pathway. We identified critical interventions and 30-day outcomes. We compared proportions of admissions and adverse events rates with a chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test.

Results

In the “before” phase, 570 patients were enrolled, with 334 (59%) admitted and 27 (5%) placed in the EDOU; 3% of patients discharged from the ED had critical interventions within 30 days and 10% returned. After the management pathway was introduced, 489 patients were enrolled; 34% (p<0.001) of pathway patients were admitted while 20% were placed in the EDOU; 3% (p=0.99) of discharged patients had critical interventions at 30 days and 3% returned (p=0.001).

Conclusion

A focused syncope management pathway effectively reduces hospital admissions and adverse events following discharge and returns to the ED.

The Results of Randomized Controlled Trials in Emergency Medicine Are Frequently Fragile

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials govern evidence-based clinical practice, and it is therefore critical that their results be robust. We aim to investigate the fragility of randomized controlled trials in emergency medicine by determining how often significance would be nullified with small changes in outcomes using the fragility index.

METHODS

We conducted a methodological systematic review of randomized controlled trials in emergency medicine published in the top 10 general medicine journals and the top 10 emergency medicine journals. Inclusion criteria required that trials be emergency medicine studies structured with a 2-arm or 2-by-2 factorial design and report at least 1 statistically significant dichotomous outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 180 trials met inclusion criteria. The median fragility index across all trials in emergency medicine was 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 2 to 10) and the median sample size was 140 (IQR 69.5 to 286). For trials from general medicine journals (n=32), the median fragility index was 9 (IQR 4 to 16.5) and the median sample size was 415.5 (IQR 219.5 to 901); for trials from emergency medicine journals (n=148), the median fragility index was 4 (IQR 1 to 9) and the median sample size was 119 (IQR 60 to 227.25). One third of all trials (62/180) had a loss to follow-up that was greater than or equal to the fragility index. There was a modest correlation between fragility index and total number of events (r=0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23 to 0.48) and a weak correlation between fragility index and total sample size (r=0.26; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.39). There was no correlation between fragility index and either P value (r=-0.14; 95% CI -0.28 to -0.006) or Science Citation Index (r=0.07; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.22).

CONCLUSION

The statistical significance of the results of randomized controlled trials in emergency medicine was often contingent on a small number of events. Until frequentist interpretation of clinical trials is replaced with Bayesian analysis, the fragility index may have utility as a tool to aid clinicians in assessing the robustness of randomized controlled trials in emergency medicine when considered in conjunction with the fragility quotient and other reported metrics.

Trends in use of echocardiography in hospitalized patients with syncope

PURPOSE

We sought to assess the trends in use, predictors of echocardiography, and its impact on in-hospital mortality in patients admitted with syncope using a large national database.

METHODS

Utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2001 to 2014, we identified adult patients (>18 years) with a primary discharge diagnosis of syncope and use of echocardiogram was ascertained.

RESULTS

A total of 3 174 619 patients with a primary discharge diagnosis of syncope were identified, of which 184 167 (5.8%) underwent an echocardiogram. The rate of syncope hospitalization remained constant between 2001 and 2009 (1.1/1000 US population) but has since decreased steadily to about 0.5/1000 US population in 2014. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, the rate of echocardiogram use increased significantly from 5.1% in 2001 to 6.8% in 2014 (2.7% relative increase per year [P_trend  = 0.024]). Predictors of use were cardiac disorders, hypertension, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and renal failure. After adjusting for baseline risk, use of echocardiography was not associated with in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.827, P = 0.155), but was associated with a 14.6% increase in adjusted length of stay and a 22.6% increase in adjusted hospital cost compared to no echocardiography use (both P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The admission rates for syncope are decreasing and use of echocardiography in hospitalized patients with syncope is appropriately low. Given the lack of any favorable impact on mortality and the association with increased costs, there is a continued need to emphasize evidence-based use of echocardiography in patients presenting with syncope.

Short-stay unit hospitalisation vs. standard care outcomes in older internal medicine patients-a randomised clinical trial

Background

the effect of hospitalisation in emergency department-based short-stay units (SSUs) has not been studied in older patients. We compared SSU hospitalisation with standard care at an Internal Medicine Department (IMD) in acutely admitted older internal medicine patients.

Methods

pragmatic randomised clinical trial. We randomly assigned patients aged 75 years or older, acutely admitted for an internal medicine disease and assessed to be suitable for SSU hospitalisation to SSU hospitalisation or IMD hospitalisation. SSU hospitalisation was provided by a pragmatic 'fast-track' principle. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, change in Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) score within 90 days from admission, in-hospital length of stay and unplanned readmissions within 30 days after discharge.

Results

between January 2015 and October 2016, 430 participants were randomised (median age 84 years in both groups). Ninety-day mortality was 22(11%) in the SSU group and 32(15%) in the IMD group (odds ratio (OR) 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-1.18; P = 0.16). When comparing the SSU group to the IMD group, 16(8%) vs. 45(21%) experienced at least one adverse event (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.17-0.56; P < 0.001); 6(3%) vs. 35(20%) experienced a reduction in IADL score within 90 days from admission (P < 0.001); median in-hospital length of stay was 73 h [interquartile range, IQR 36-147] vs. 100 h [IQR 47-169], (P < 0.001), and 26(13%) vs. 58(29%) were readmitted (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.22-0.61; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

mortality at 90 days after admission was not significantly lower in the SSU group, but SSU hospitalisation was associated with a lower risk of adverse events, less functional decline, fewer readmissions and shorter hospital stay.

Trial registration

NCT02395718.

[Management of syncope in clinical practice : What has changed according to the new ESC guidelines 2018?]

Syncope is a common problem in clinical practice, which affects approximately 1% of patients admitted to European emergency departments. The clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) are based on the newest scientific data in the field and have provided clinical cardiologists with a structured therapeutic approach for affected patients over many years. The previous ESC guidelines on syncope were published in 2009 and are compared to the most recent edition, which was published in 2018. This review summarizes the most important innovations with respect to the diagnostic principles and treatment of syncope. The initial assessment of the patient and the risk stratification in the emergency department are the focus of the review. Another important topic that is adequately covered in the current guidelines is the rising significance of implantable loop recorders for the evaluation of unexplained syncope and the assessment of potential indications for a definitive treatment with a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Additional changes involve the evidence level with respect to the use of other diagnostic (ECG monitoring, tilt testing) and therapeutic measures (indications for pacemaker implantation, catheter ablation of tachycardiac rhythm disorders).

Use of a Pediatric Syncope Unit Improves Diagnosis and Lowers Costs: A Hospital-Based Experience

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of a dedicated pediatric syncope unit on the diagnostic and therapeutic management of children with suspected syncope. We also evaluated the effectiveness of the pediatric syncope unit model in decreasing unnecessary tests and hospitalizations, minimizing social costs, and improving diagnostic yield.

STUDY DESIGN

This single-center cohort observational, prospective study enrolled 2278 consecutive children referred to Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital from 2012 to 2017. Characteristics of the study population, number and type of admission examinations, and diagnostic findings before the pediatric syncope unit was implemented (2012-2013) and after the pediatric syncope unit was implemented (2014-2015 and 2016-2017) were compared.

RESULTS

The proportion of undefined syncope, number of unnecessary diagnostic tests performed, and number of hospital stay days decreased significantly (P < .0001), with an overall decrease in costs. A multivariable logistic regression analysis, adjusted for confounding variables (age, sex, number of diagnostic tests), the period after pediatric syncope unit (2016-2017) resulted as the best independent predictor of effectiveness for a defined diagnosis of syncope (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric syncope unit organization with fast-tracking access more appropriate diagnostic tests is effective in terms of accuracy of diagnostic yield and reduction of costs.

Recommendations for the use of electrophysiological study: Update 2018

The field of cardiac electrophysiology has greatly developed during the past decades. Consequently, the use of electrophysiological studies (EPSs) in clinical practice has also significantly augmented, with a progressively increasing number of certified electrophysiology centers and specialists. Since Zipes et al published the Guidelines for Clinical Intracardiac Electrophysiology and Catheter Ablation Procedures in 1995, no official document summarizing current EPS indications has been published. The current paper focuses on summarizing all relevant data of the role of EPS in patients with different types of cardiac pathologies and provides up-to-date recommendations on this topic. For this purpose, the PubMed database was screened for relevant articles in English up to December 2018 and ESC and ACC/AHA Clinical Practice Guidelines, and EHRA/HRS/APHRS position statements related to the current topic were analyzed. Current recommendations for the use of EPS in clinical practice are discussed and presented in 17 distinct cardiac pathologies. A short rationale, evidence, and indications are provided for each cardiac disease/group of diseases. In conclusion, because of its capability to establish a diagnosis in patients with a variety of cardiac pathologies, the EPS remains a useful tool in the evaluation of patients with cardiac arrhythmias and conduction disorders and is capable of establishing indications for cardiac device implantation and guide catheter ablation procedures.

Application of Syncope Guidelines in the Emergency Department Do Not Reduce Admission Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Low-risk syncope accounts for a large proportion of hospital admissions; however, inpatient investigations are often not necessary and are rarely diagnostic. Reducing the number of low-risk syncope admissions can likely lower health care resource consumption and overall expenditure. Application of syncope guidelines by physicians in the emergency department provides a standardized approach that may potentially reduce admissions and lead to health care resource utilization savings.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 1229 syncope presentations was conducted at 2 major academic centres spanning 1 year. Three major society guidelines and position statements were applied to determine the effect on admission rates.

RESULTS

A total of 1031 true syncope charts were included in the analysis; 407 (39%) were admitted and 624 (61%) were discharged by the treating physician (MD). There was a significant difference in the mean [standard deviation] age (75 [14] vs 55 [22]) and baseline cardiovascular disease, including congestive heart failure 51/407 (13%) vs 28/624 (5%), coronary artery disease 125/407 (31%) vs 91/624 (15%), and structural heart disease 36/407 (9%) vs 26/624 (4%), between admitted and not admitted patients, respectively (P < 0.01). All guidelines warranted more low-risk admissions when compared with 19% by the MD: Canadian Cardiovascular Society 34% (P < 0.01), American College of Emergency Physicians 22% (P = 0.03), and European Society of Cardiology 26% (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, application of the current syncope guidelines to an emergency department population is unlikely to reduce low-risk hospital admissions.

Hospitalisation in short-stay units for adults with internal medicine diseases and conditions

BACKGROUND

Short-stay units are hospital units that provide short-term care for selected patients. Studies have indicated that short-stay units might reduce admission rates, time of hospital stays, hospital readmissions and expenditure without compromising the quality of care. Short-stay units are often defined by a target patient category, a target function, and a target time frame. Hypothetically, short-stay units could be established as part of any department, but this review focuses on short-stay units that provide care for participants with internal medicine diseases and conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess beneficial and harmful effects of short-stay unit hospitalisation compared with usual care in people with internal medicine diseases and conditions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers up to 13 December 2017 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We also searched several grey literature sources and performed a forward citation search for included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials and cluster-randomised trials, comparing hospitalisation in a short-stay unit with usual care (hospitalisation in a traditional hospital ward or other services). We defined a short-stay unit to be a hospital ward where the targeted length of stay in hospital for patients was five days or less. We included both multipurpose and specialised short-stay units. Participants were adults admitted to hospital with an internal medicine disease or condition. We excluded surgical, obstetric, psychiatric, gynaecological, and ambulatory participants. Trials were included irrespective of publication status, date, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included trial. We measured intervention effect sizes by meta-analyses for two primary outcomes, mortality and serious adverse events, and one secondary outcome, hospital readmission. We narratively reported the following important outcomes: quality of life, activities of daily living, non-serious adverse events, and costs. We used risk ratio differences of 15% for mortality and of 20% for serious adverse events for minimal relevant clinical consideration. We rated the certainty of the evidence and the strength of recommendations of the outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 records reporting on 14 randomised trials with a total of 2872 participants. One trial was ongoing. Thirteen trials evaluated short-stay unit hospitalisation for six specific conditions (acute decompensated heart failure (one trial), asthma (one trial), atrial fibrillation (one trial), chest pain (seven trials), syncope (two trials), and transient ischaemic attack (one trial)) and one trial investigated participants presenting with miscellaneous internal medicine disease and conditions. The components of the intervention differed among the trials as dictated by the trial participants' condition. All included trials were at high risk of bias.The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low. Consequently, it is uncertain whether hospitalisation in short-stay units compared with usual care reduces mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.15) 5 trials (seven additional trials reporting on 1299 participants reported no deaths in either group)); serious adverse events (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.54; 7 trials (one additional trial with 108 participants reported no serious adverse events in either group)), and hospital readmission (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.19, 8 trials (one additional trial with 424 participants did not report results for participants)). There was not enough information to confirm or refute that short-stay unit hospitalisation had relevant effects on quality of life, activities of daily living, non-serious adverse events, and costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the quantity and the certainty of the evidence was very low. Consequently, it is uncertain whether there are any beneficial or harmful effects of short-stay unit hospitalisation for adults with internal medicine diseases and conditions - more trials comparing the effects of short-stay units with usual care are needed. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risk of bias and low risks of random errors to improve the overall confidence in the evidence.

Geographical Differences in Comorbidity Burden and Outcomes in Adults With Syncope Hospitalizations in Canada

A recent study found that rates of hospitalization for syncope vary across provinces; however, it is unknown whether differences in comorbidity burden and outcomes also exist. The Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database was used to identify primary syncope hospitalizations (ICD-10 code R55) from 2004 to 2013 for all provinces (except Quebec). Charlson comorbidity score was calculated from comorbidities at the time of hospitalization. Outcomes were defined as in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission for any cause, and syncope. Logistic regression models were constructed for odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to estimate interprovincial differences in outcomes. The interprovincial range (IPR) for mean age was 61.1 ± 17.5 to 73.7 ± 16.3 years, and at least half were male patients. There were significant differences in comorbidity burden across provinces (P < 0.01); however, the majority of patients had a Charlson comorbidity score = 0 (IPR, 53.9%- 71.9%). In multivariable analysis, compared with Ontario, in-hospital mortality was higher for British Columbia (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.22-2.06), Nova Scotia (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.05-2.65), and Newfoundland (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.29-4.00); 30-day readmission for any cause was higher for British Columbia (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.26), Alberta (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07-1.31), Manitoba (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.18-1.56), and Prince Edward Island (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.0-1.89), and all outcomes were higher in Saskatchewan. There is significant interprovincial heterogeneity in comorbidity burden and outcomes for hospitalizations for syncope. Future research evaluating whether standardized practices for management of syncope reduce variability and improve healthcare utilization and costs is needed.

Outcomes in syncope research: a systematic review and critical appraisal

Syncope is the common clinical manifestation of different diseases, and this makes it difficult to define what outcomes should be considered in prognostic studies. The aim of this study is to critically analyze the outcomes considered in syncope studies through systematic review and expert consensus. We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify prospective studies enrolling consecutive patients presenting to the Emergency Department with syncope, with data on the characteristics and incidence of short-term outcomes. Then, the strengths and weaknesses of each outcome were discussed by international syncope experts to provide practical advice to improve future selection and assessment. 31 studies met our inclusion criteria. There is a high heterogeneity in both outcome choice and incidence between the included studies. The most commonly considered 7-day outcomes are mortality, dysrhythmias, myocardial infarction, stroke, and rehospitalisation. The most commonly considered 30-day outcomes are mortality, haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, dysrhythmias, myocardial infarction, pacemaker or implantable defibrillator implantation, stroke, pulmonary embolism, and syncope relapse. We present a critical analysis of the pros and cons of the commonly considered outcomes, and provide possible solutions to improve their choice in ED syncope studies. We also support global initiatives to promote the standardization of patient management and data collection.

Syncope: current knowledge, uncertainties and strategies for management optimisation in the emergency department

Admission rates and expenditures for syncope remain high. This unsatisfactory management could be due to several factors, including lack of evidence-based strategy, poor accuracy of clinical decision rules, difficulty in disseminating guidelines, as well as uncertainties concerning management of intermediate-risk patients and role of observation protocols and syncope units. To optimise management, it has been proposed to adopt a pragmatic, symptoms-based definition of syncope and a classification related to the underlying mechanism rather than suspected aetiology. It has also been emphasised the importance of identifying patients at intermediate risk as they can be safely discharged after an intensive emergency department evaluation. A further improvement might result from a research implementation to validate the role of observation protocols and to select patients amenable to be sent to outpatient syncope units. Finally, future studies on prognostic significance of syncope should be performed with a more careful selection of outcomes and a greater uniformity.

[Do we need syncope units? : Experience from Bolzano, South Tyrol (Italy)]

Syncope is a common cause for presentation to the emergency department. Because of the numerous differential diagnoses which can be life-threatening, it can be a challenging work-up for the physician. This often results in admission rates that are too high and hospital stays that are too long with consequent high costs. Several studies have shown the inferiority of best-clinical practice to an evidence-based approach in syncope work-up, which results in underdiagnosis and often incorrect diagnosis of syncope. The consequences are undirected therapies and subsequently high recurrence rates of syncope, which lead to limited quality of life and readmissions. For this reason, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope recommend the organization of Syncope Units. Through a standardized and evidence-based approach, the diagnostic and therapeutic work-up can be done in a safe and effective manner, allowing an organized follow-up and further management of patients with syncope. This article summarizes the reasons for the need of syncope units and explains the practical implementation of the guidelines using the example of the Syncope Unit in Bolzano, South Tyrol (Italy).

Trends of hospitalizations for syncope/collapse in the United States from 2004 to 2013-An analysis of national inpatient sample

INTRODUCTION

Syncope/collapse is a common reason for emergency department visits, and approximately 30-40% of these individuals are hospitalized. We examined changes in hospitalization rates, in-hospital mortality, and cost of syncope/collapse-related hospital care in the United States from 2004 to 2013.

METHODS

We used the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2004 to 2013 to identify syncope/collapse-related hospitalizations using ICD-9, code 780.2, as the principal discharge diagnosis. Data are presented as mean ± SEM.

RESULTS

From 2004 to 2013, there was a 42% reduction in hospitalizations with a principal discharge diagnosis of syncope/collapse from 54,259 (national estimate 253,591) in 2004 to 31,427 (national estimate 156,820) in 2013 (P < 0.0001). The mean length of hospital stays decreased (2.88 ± 0.04 days in 2004 vs. 2.54 ± 0.02 in 2013; P < 0.0001), while in-hospital mortality did not change (0.28% in 2004 vs. 0.18% in 2013; P  =  0.12). However, mean charges (inflation adjusted) for syncope/collapse-related hospitalization increased by 43.6% from $17,514 in 2004 to $25,160 in 2013 (P < 0.0001). The rates of implantation of permanent pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillator remained low during these hospitalizations, and decreased over time (P for both < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalization rates for syncope/collapse have decreased significantly in the US from 2004 to 2013. Despite a modest reduction in length of stay, the cost of syncope/collapse-related hospital care has increased.

Role of emergency department observation units in the management of patients with unexplained syncope: a critical review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to establish the role of standardized emergency department (ED) observation protocols in the management of syncopal patients as an alternative to ordinary admission. A systematic electronic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials or observational studies evaluating syncopal patients managed in ED observation units. Data regarding mean length of stay, rate of etiological diagnosis, admission rate, and incidence of short-term serious outcomes were extracted. Six mostly single-center, small sized studies characterized by high heterogeneity, were included. A total of 458 patients were included with a balanced sex distribution (male 50.2%), a mean age of 60.1 years, and a considerable prevalence of heart disease (32.4%). Pooled analysis of the outcomes showed a mean stay of 28.2 hours, an etiological diagnosis rate of 67.3%, an admission rate of 18.5%, and a very low incidence of short-term serious outcomes (2.8%). Due to elevated diagnostic yield and low incidence of short-term adverse events, ED observation units-based management strategy seems ideal for patients with syncope. Nevertheless, further research is needed to identify criteria for selecting patients to be managed with this approach, define evaluation protocols, and confirm the safety of this strategy.

A Population-Based Cohort Study Evaluating Outcomes and Costs for Syncope Presentations to the Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine outcomes and costs of patients with syncope admitted and discharged from the emergency department (ED).

BACKGROUND

ED visits for syncope are common, yet the impact on health care utilization is relatively unknown.

METHODS

A total of 51,831 consecutive patients presented to the ED with a primary diagnosis of syncope (International Classification of Diseases-9 code 780.2 and International Classification of Diseases-10 code R55) in Alberta, Canada from 2006 to 2014. Outcomes included 30-day syncope ED and hospital readmissions; 30-day and 1-year mortality; and annual inpatient, outpatient, physician, and drug costs, cumulative.

RESULTS

Of adults presenting to the ED, 6.6% were hospitalized and discharged with a primary diagnosis of syncope (Cohort 1), 8.7% were hospitalized and discharged with a primary diagnosis other than syncope (Cohort 2), and 84.7% were discharged home with a syncope diagnosis (Cohort 3). The 30-day ED revisits for syncope varied from 1.2% (Cohort 2) to 2.4% (Cohort 1) (p < 0.001), and readmission rates were <1% among cohorts. Short- and long-term mortality rates were highest for Cohort 2 and lowest for Cohort 3 (30-day mortality: Cohort 1 of 1.2%, Cohort 2 of 5.2%, Cohort 3 of 0.4%; p < 0.001) (1-year mortality: Cohort 1 of 9.2%, Cohort 2 of 17.7%, Cohort 3 of 3.0%; p < 0.001). Total cost of syncope presentations was $530.6 million (Cohort 1: $75.3 million; $29,519/patient, Cohort 2: $138.1 million; $42,042/patient, Cohort 3: $317.3 million; $9,963/patient; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with syncope presenting to the ED were discharged and had a favorable prognosis but overall costs were high compared with patients hospitalized. Further research is needed for cost-saving strategies across all cohorts.

A systematic review to identify and assess the effectiveness of alternatives for people over the age of 65 who are at risk of potentially avoidable hospital admission

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

There are some older patients who are 'at the decision margin' of admission. This systematic review sought to explore this issue with the following objective: what admission alternatives are there for older patients and are they safe, effective and cost-effective? A secondary objective was to identify the characteristics of those older patients for whom the decision to admit to hospital may be unclear.

DESIGN

Systematic review of controlled studies (April 2005-December 2016) with searches in Medline, Embase, Cinahl and CENTRAL databases. The protocol is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42015020371). Studies were assessed using Cochrane risk of bias criteria, and relevant reviews were assessed with the AMSTAR tool. The results are presented narratively and discussed.

SETTING

Primary and secondary healthcare interface.

PARTICIPANTS

People aged over 65 years at risk of an unplanned admission.

INTERVENTIONS

Any community-based intervention offered as an alternative to admission to an acute hospital.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES

Reduction in secondary care use, patient-related outcomes, safety and costs.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies and seven systematic reviews were identified. These recruited patients with both specific conditions and mixed chronic and acute conditions. The interventions involved paramedic/emergency care practitioners (n=3), emergency department-based interventions (n=3), community hospitals (n=2) and hospital-at-home services (n=11). Data suggest that alternatives to admission appear safe with potential to reduce secondary care use and length of time receiving care. There is a lack of patient-related outcomes and cost data. The important features of older patients for whom the decision to admit is uncertain are: age over 75 years, comorbidities/multi-morbidities, dementia, home situation, social support and individual coping abilities.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review describes and assesses evidence on alternatives to acute care for older patients and shows that many of the options available are safe and appear to reduce resource use. However, cost analyses and patient preference data are lacking.