Mayo registry for telemetry efficacy in arrest study: An evaluation of the feasibility of the do not intubate code status

Introduction: Guidelines recommend discussing code status with patients on hospital admission. No study has evaluated the feasibility of a full code with do not intubate (DNI) status. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients who experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest was performed between May 1, 2008 and June 20, 2014. A descriptive analysis was created based on whether patients required mechanical ventilatory support during the hospitalization and comparisons were made between both patient subsets. Results: A total of 239 patients were included. Almost all (n = 218, 91.2%) required intubation during the hospitalization. Over half (n = 117, 53.7%) were intubated on the same day as the cardiopulmonary arrest and 91 patients (41.7%) were intubated at the time of arrest. Comparisons between intubated and non-intubated patients showed little differences in clinical characteristics, except for a higher proportion of medical cardiac etiology for admission in patients who did not require intubation (n = 10, 47.6% versus n = 55, 25.2%; p = 0.18) and initial arrest rhythm of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (n = 8, 38.1% versus n = 50, 22.9%; p = 0.37). No differences in 24-hour and posthospital survivals were present. Conclusion: Mechanical ventilatory support is commonly utilized in patients who experience a cardiopulmonary arrest. The DNI status may not be a feasible code status option for most patients.

Does this patient need telemetry? An analysis of telemetry ordering practices at an academic medical center

INTRODUCTION

The American Heart Association and Choosing Wisely campaign recommend guideline-based usage of telemetry. Inappropriate use leads to increased costs, alarm fatigue, and inefficient nursing care. This study assesses provider ordering practices for telemetry at a US-based academic hospital.

METHODS

This retrospective study includes all telemetry orders in the medicine and progressive care units from April 2014 to March 2015. Indications were grouped into categories per American Heart Association guidelines.

RESULTS

The top 3 cardiac indications included angina/acute coronary syndrome (35.3%), arrhythmias (19.7%), and heart failure (10.2%). However, noncardiac indications accounted for 20.2% of orders, including respiratory conditions (17.4%), infection (17.4%), substance abuse (14.0%), bleeding (12.4%), vital sign monitoring (10.4%), altered mental status (7.0%), and pulmonary embolus/deep vein thrombosis (7.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

One-fifth of patients were monitored on telemetry for noncardiac indications. We recommend further study on the benefits and risks of telemetry in these patients and systems-based changes for appropriate usage.