Prevalence of acute neurology: a 2-week snapshot in a district general hospital

Clinical outcome prediction of acute neurological patients admitted to the emergency department: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and modified SOFA score

Background

The aim of this study was to determine the ability of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (SOFA) and modified SOFA score (mSOFA) as predictive tools for 2-day and 28-day mortality and ICU admission in patients with acute neurological pathology treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs).

Methods

An observational, prospective cohort study in adults with acute neurological disease transferred by ambulance to an ED was conducted from 1 January 2019 to 31 August 2022 in five hospitals in Castilla-León (Spain). Score discrimination was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the score.

Results

A total of 640 adult patients with neurological disease were included. For the prediction of 2-day mortality (all-cause), mSOFA presented a higher AUC than SOFA (mSOFA = 0.925 vs. SOFA = 0.902). This was not the case for 28-day mortality, for which SOFA was higher than mSOFA (mSOFA = 0.852 vs. SOFA = 0.875). Finally, ICU admission showed that SOFA was higher than mSOFA (mSOFA = 0.834 vs. SOFA = 0.845).

Conclusion

Both mSOFA and SOFA presented similar predictive ability, with mSOFA being the best predictor for short-term mortality and SOFA being the best predictor for medium-term mortality, as well as for ICU admission. These results in a cohort of patients with acute neurological pathology pave the way for the use of both predictive tools in the ED. The inclusion of these tools could improve the clinical assessment and further treatment of neurological patients, who commonly present the worst outcomes.

Numbers and types of neurological emergencies in England and the influence of socioeconomic deprivation: a retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics data

OBJECTIVES

In this first large-scale analysis of neurological emergency admissions in England, we determine the number and types of emergency admissions with neurological emergency diagnostic codes, how many are under the care of a neurologist or neurosurgeon and how such admissions vary by levels of deprivation.

DESIGN

Retrospective empirical research employing a derived list of neurological emergency diagnostic codes SETTING: This study used the Hospital Episode Statistics data set for the financial year 2019/2020 based on 17 million in-year inpatient admissions in England including 6.5 million (100%) emergency admissions with any diagnosis codes.

RESULTS

There were 1.4 million (21.2%) emergency inpatient admissions with a mention of any neurological code, approx. 248 455 (3.8%) with mention of a specific neurological emergency code from the derived list, and 72 485 (1.1%) included such a code as the primary reason for admission. The highest number of in-year admissions for adults was for epilepsy (145 995), with epilepsy as the primary diagnostic code in 15 945 (10.9%). Acute nerve root/spinal cord syndrome (41 215), head injury (29 235) and subarachnoid haemorrhage (18 505) accounted for the next three highest number of admissions. 3230 (1.4%) in-year emergency hospital admissions with mention of a neurological emergency code were under the care of a neurologist or neurosurgeon, with only 1315 (0.9%) admissions with mention of an epilepsy code under a neurologist. There was significant variation for epilepsy and functional neurological disorders (FNDs) in particular by Index of Multiple Deprivation decile. The association between deprivation and epilepsy and FND was significant with p-values of 2.5e-6 and 1.5e-8, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified important findings in relation to the burden of neurological emergency admissions but further work is needed, with greater clinical engagement in diagnostic coding, to better understand the implications for workforce and changes to service delivery needing to be implemented.

Comparison of Nine Early Warning Scores for Identification of Short-Term Mortality in Acute Neurological Disease in Emergency Department

(1) Background: The aim was screening the performance of nine Early Warning Scores (EWS), to identify patients at high-risk of premature impairment and to detect intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, as well as to track the 2-, 7-, 14-, and 28-day mortality in a cohort of patients diagnosed with an acute neurological condition. (2) Methods: We conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational study, calculating the EWS [Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), National Early Warning Score (NEWS), VitalPAC Early Warning Score (ViEWS), Modified Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (MREMS), Early Warning Score (EWS), Hamilton Early Warning Score (HEWS), Standardised Early Warning Score (SEWS), WHO Prognostic Scored System (WPSS), and Rapid Acute Physiology Score (RAPS)] upon the arrival of patients to the emergency department. (3) Results: In all, 1160 patients were included: 808 patients were hospitalized, 199 cases (17%) required ICU care, and 6% of patients died (64 cases) within 2 days, which rose to 16% (183 cases) within 28 days. The highest area under the curve for predicting the need for ICU admissions was obtained by RAPS and MEWS. For predicting mortality, MREMS obtained the best scores for 2- and 28-day mortality. (4) Conclusions: This is the first study to explore whether several EWS accurately identify the risk of ICU admissions and mortality, at different time points, in patients with acute neurological disorders. Every score analyzed obtained good results, but it is suggested that the use of RAPS, MEWS, and MREMS should be preferred in the acute setting, for patients with neurological impairment.

Improving liaison neurology services

Liaison neurology (consulting with inpatient ward referrals) is the main way that most patients admitted with neurological disease will access neurology services. Most liaison neurology services are responsive, seeing referrals on request, but they also can be proactive, with a regular neurology presence in the acute medical unit. Fewer than half of hospitals in England have electronic systems, yet these can facilitate the process-allowing electronic responses to advise on investigations before seeing the patient, and arranging follow-up after-as well as prioritising referrals and documenting the process. In this time of COVID-19, there are additional benefits in providing prompt remote advice. Improving the way liaison neurology is delivered can improve patient outcomes and save money by shortening admissions. This hidden work of the neurologists needs to be recorded and recognised.