Older patients admitted to an EDOU are an at-risk group and benefit from geriatric assessment before discharge.

Background: The American College of Emergency Physicians has identified early palliative care referral for patients with advanced cancer as a key competent of the Choosing Wisely campaign. Objectives: To study the feasibility of a new 3-way model of care between emergency department (ED), hospital palliative care department, and inpatient/home hospice. Methods: This was a prospective, descriptive study that included oncology patients who attended the hospital ED over a 3-year period from January 2015 to December 2017. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) presence of metastatic cancer with either; (2) any 1 of the following symptoms: pain, dyspnea, nausea and vomiting, delirium, or swelling; or (3) potential care difficulties (requiring home hospice care or inpatient hospice). Results: A total of 340 patients were referred from the ED. Mean age was 72 years, 59% were males and 41% females, and the majority (88%) were Chinese. The most common cancers were lung 89 (26%), colorectal 71 (21%), and hepatobiliary cancer 49 (14%). The most common symptoms on Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scoring were pain (34%), poor appetite (31%), and dyspnea (26%). Conclusions: This tripartite model of palliative care, hospice, and ED collaboration allows earlier access to palliative care in the ED and direct admissions to the palliative care unit and comfort care rooms. The ED patients who did not need admission were also attended to in the palliative care "Hot Clinics" within a week with home hospice help. Patients who required inpatient hospice care were directly admitted there from the ED.

BackgroundTo determine if risk stratification followed by rapid geriatric screening in an emergency department (ED) reduced functional decline, ED reattendance and hospitalisation.MethodThis was a quasi-randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised by the last digit of their national registration identity card (NRIC). Odd number controls received standard ED care; even number patients received geriatric screening, followed by intervention and/or onward referrals. Patients were followed up for 12 months.ResultsThere were 500 and 280 patients in the control and intervention groups. The intervention group had higher Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) scores (34.3% vs 25.4% TRST ≥3, p = 0.01) and lower baseline Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL) scores (22.84 vs 24.18, p < 0.01). 82.9% of the intervention group had unmet needs; 62.1% accepted our interventions. Common positive findings were fall risk (65.0%), vision (61.4%), and footwear (58.2%). 28.2% were referred to a geriatric clinic and 11.8% were admitted. 425 (85.0%) controls and 234 (83.6%) in the intervention group completed their follow-up. After adjusting for TRST and baseline IADL, the intervention group had significant preservation in function (Basic ADL -0.99 vs -0.24, p < 0.01; IADL -2.57 vs +0.45, p < 0.01) at 12 months. The reduction in ED reattendance (OR0.75, CI 0.55-1.03, p = 0.07) and hospitalization (OR0.77, CI0.57-1.04, p = 0.09) were not significant, however the real difference would have been wider as 21.2% of the control group received geriatric screening at the request of the ED doctor. A major limitation was that a large proportion of patients who were randomized to the intervention group either refused (18.8%) or left the ED before being approached (32.0%). These two groups were not followed up, and hence were excluded in our analysis.ConclusionRisk stratification and focused geriatric screening in ED resulted in significant preservation of patients’ function at 12 months.Trial registrationNational Healthcare Group (NHG) Domain Specific Review Board (DSRB) C/09/023. Registered 5th March 2009.

No abstract

No abstract