Background: Delta shock index (SI; i.e., change in SI over time) has been shown to predict mortality and need for surgical intervention among trauma patients at the emergency department (ED). However, the usefulness of delta SI for prognosis assessment in non-traumatic critically ill patients at the ED remains unknown. The aim of this study was to analyze the association between delta SI during ED management and in-hospital outcomes in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).Method: This was a retrospective study conducted in two tertiary medical centers in Taiwan from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017. All adult non-traumatic patients who visited the ED and who were subsequently admitted to the ICU were included. We calculated delta SI by subtracting SI at ICU admission from SI at ED triage, and we analyzed its association with in-hospital outcomes. SI was defined as the ratio of heart rate to systolic blood pressure (SBP). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay (HLOS) and early mortality. Early mortality was defined as mortality within 48 h of ICU admission.Result: During the study period, 11,268 patients met the criteria and were included. Their mean age was 64.5 ± 15.9 years old. Overall, 5,830 (51.6%) patients had positive delta SI. Factors associated with a positive delta SI were multiple comorbidities (51.2% vs. 46.3%, p < 0.001) and high Simplified Acute Physiology Score [39 (29–51) vs. 37 (28–47), p < 0.001). Patients with positive delta SI were more likely to have tachycardia, hypotension, and higher SI at ICU admission. In the regression analysis, high delta SI was associated with in-hospital mortality [aOR (95% CI): 1.21 (1.03–1.42)] and early mortality [aOR (95% CI): 1.26 (1.07–1.48)], but not for HLOS [difference (95% CI): 0.34 (−0.48 to 1.17)]. In the subgroup analysis, high delta SI had higher odds ratios for both mortality and early mortality in elderly [aOR (95% CI): 1.59 (1.11–2.29)] and septic patients [aOR (95% CI): 1.54 (1.13–2.11)]. It also showed a higher odds ratio for early mortality in patients with triage SBP <100 mmHg [aOR (95% CI): 2.14 (1.21–3.77)] and patients with triage SI ≥ 0.9 [aOR (95% CI): 1.62 (1.01–2.60)].Conclusion: High delta SI during ED stay is correlated with in-hospital mortality and early mortality in patients admitted to the ICU via ED. Prompt resuscitation should be performed, especially for those with old age, sepsis, triage SBP <100 mmHg, or triage SI ≥ 0.9.

Background: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a leading cause of death worldwide. A shock index (SI), modified SI (MSI), delta-SI, and shock index-C (SIC) are known predictors of STEMI. This retrospective cohort study was designed to compare the predictive value of the SI, MSI, delta-SI, and SIC with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk scales. Method: Patients > 20 years old with STEMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were included. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis with the Youden index was performed to calculate the optimal cutoff values for these predictors. Results: Overall, 1552 adult STEMI cases were analyzed. The thresholds for the emergency department (ED) SI, MSI, SIC, and TIMI risk scales for in-hospital mortality were 0.75, 0.97, 21.00, and 5.5, respectively. Accordingly, ED SIC had better predictive power than the ED SI and ED MSI. The predictive power was relatively higher than TIMI risk scales, but the difference did not achieve statistical significance. After adjusting for confounding factors, the ED SI > 0.75, MSI > 0.97, SIC > 21.0, and TIMI risk scales > 5.5 were statistically and significantly associated with in-hospital mortality of STEMI. Compared with the ED SI and MSI, SIC (>21.0) had better sensitivity (67.2%, 95% CI, 58.6–75.9%), specificity (83.5%, 95% CI, 81.6–85.4%), PPV (24.8%, 95% CI, 20.2–29.6%), and NPV (96.9%, 95% CI, 96.0–97.9%) for in-hospital mortality of STEMI. Conclusions: SIC had better discrimination ability than the SI, MSI, and delta-SI. Compared with the TIMI risk scales, the ACU value of SIC was still higher. Therefore, SIC might be a convenient and rapid tool for predicting the outcome of STEMI.

The objective of this multi-center retrospective cohort study was to devise a predictive tool known as RAPID-ED. This model identifies non-traumatic adult patients at significant risk for cardiac arrest within 48 hours post-admission from the emergency department. Data from 224,413 patients admitted through the emergency department (2016-2020) was analyzed, incorporating vital signs, lab tests, and administered therapies. A multivariable regression model was devised to anticipate early cardiac arrest. The efficacy of the RAPID-ED model was evaluated against traditional scoring systems like National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and its predictive ability was gauged via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in both hold-out validation set and external validation set. RAPID-ED outperformed traditional models in predicting cardiac arrest with an AUC of 0.819 in the hold-out validation set and 0.807 in the external validation set. In this critical care update, RAPID-ED offers an innovative approach to assessing patient risk, aiding emergency physicians in post-discharge care decisions from the emergency department. High-risk score patients (≥13) may benefit from early ICU admission for intensive monitoring. As we progress with advancements in critical care, tools like RAPID-ED will prove instrumental in refining care strategies for critically ill patients, fostering an improved prognosis and potentially mitigating mortality rates.

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) admission following a short-term emergency department (ED) revisit has been considered a particularly undesirable outcome among return-visit patients, although their in-hospital prognosis has not been discussed. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between adult patients admitted to the ICU after unscheduled ED revisits and those admitted during index ED visits. Method: This retrospective study was conducted at two tertiary medical centers in Taiwan from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2017. All adult non-trauma patients admitted to the ICU directly via the ED during the study period were included and divided into two comparison groups: patients admitted to the ICU during index ED visits and those admitted to the ICU during return ED visits. The outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation (MV) support, profound shock, hospital length of stay (HLOS), and total medical cost. Results: Altogether, 12,075 patients with a mean (standard deviation) age of 64.6 (15.7) years were included. Among these, 5.3% were admitted to the ICU following a return ED visit within 14 days and 3.1% were admitted following a return ED visit within 7 days. After adjusting for confounding factors for multivariate regression analysis, ICU admission following an ED revisit within 14 days was not associated with an increased mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89 to 1.32), MV support (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.26), profound shock (aOR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.18), prolonged HLOS (difference: 0.04 days, 95% CI: −1.02 to 1.09), and increased total medical cost (difference: USD 361, 95% CI: −303 to 1025). Similar results were observed after the regression analysis in patients that had a 7-day return visit. Conclusion: ICU admission following a return ED visit was not associated with major in-hospital outcomes including mortality, MV support, shock, increased HLOS, or medical cost. Although ICU admissions following ED revisits are considered serious adverse events, they may not indicate poor prognosis in ED practice.