60 EVALUATING THE TIME THAT PATIENT’S WITH DEMENTIA/DELIRIUM SPEND IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO TRANSFER TO A WARD

Background

Patients with dementia and delirium are often waiting long times in the emergency department (ED) prior to being transferred to a ward bed during an acute hospital admission. This may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Best practice is for rapid triage to an appropriate bed via a delirium/dementia pathway.

Our aim was to document the patient experience time (PET) for older patients with a diagnosis of dementia or delirium in ED in an urban tertiary-referral hospital.

Methods

Over a two-week period 07/12/20–21/12/20, we identified all patients admitted under a general medical specialty through ED, aged ≥65 years, with a diagnosis of dementia or delirium on the admission sheet. Patients admitted with a stroke or hip fracture were excluded. ED PET was recorded, as well as final ward destination.

Results

We included 29 patients in the study—median age was 82 years (range 71–92); 19 (66%) were female. Delirium was the presenting complaint in 79.31% (n = 23) of cases.

Sixteen (55%) patients presented between 8 am-5 pm. The average time spent from triage to ED doctor review was 1 hour 48 minutes; from ED doctor review to medical referral −1 hour 27 minutes; from medical referral to decision for medical admission—2 hours 28 minutes; from decision for medical admission to ward admission- 5 hours. Overall, the average ED PET for these patients was 10 hours 42 minutes.

Five patients (17%) were admitted directly to a Specialist Geriatric Ward (SGW). Twenty patients (69%) did not reach a SGW during the study period.

Conclusion

Patients with dementia and delirium may spend prolonged periods of time in the ED putting them at risk for multiple complications. We hope that by introduction of a dementia/delirium combined pathway and care bundle that we can reduce PET for these vulnerable patients.

484 CHANGING PRACTICES OF DECISION MAKING REGARDING DO-NOT-ATTEMPT-CARDIOPULMONARY-RESUSCITATION ORDERS AMID THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the decision-making process regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation into focus. This study aims to analyse Do-Not-Attempt CPR (DNACPR) documentation in older hospitalised patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This was a retrospective repeated cross-sectional study. Data including co-morbidities and resuscitation status was collected on 300 patients with COVID-19 hospitalised from March 1st to May 31 s t 2020. DNACPR documentation rates in patients aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were compared to those without COVID-19 admitted during the same period. Pre-COVID-19 pandemic DNACPR documentation rates were also examined. Factors associated with DNACPR order instatement during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic were identified.

Results

Of 300 COVID-19-positive patients, 28% had a DNACPR order documented during their admission. 50% of DNAR orders were recorded within 24 hours of a positive swab result for SARS-CoV-2. Of 131 patients aged 65 years or over within the cohort admitted with COVID-19, 60.3% had a DNACPR order compared to 25.4% of 130 patients ≥65 without COVID-19 (p < 0.0001). During a comparable time period pre-pandemic, 15.4% of 130 older patients had a DNACPR order in place (p < 0.0001). Independent associations with DNACPR order documentation included increasing age (Odds Ratio [O.R.] 1.12; 95% CI 1.05-1.21); nursing home resident status (O.R. 3.57; 95% CI 1.02-12.50); frailty (O.R. 3.34; 95% CI 1.16-9.61) and chronic renal impairment (O.R. 5.49; 1.34-22.47). The case-fatality-rate of older patients with COVID-19 was 29.8% versus 5.4% without COVID-19. Of older COVID-19-positive patients, 39.2% were referred to palliative care services and 70.2% survived.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted more widespread and earlier decision-making regarding resuscitation status. Although case-fatality-rates were higher for older hospitalised patients with COVID-19, many older patients survived the illness. Advance care planning should be prioritised in all patients and should remain clinical practice despite the pandemic.