Browsing Health Studies by Author "Jackson, N."
Development and validation of a novel computer-aided score to predict the risk of in-hospital mortality for acutely ill medical admissions in two acute hospitals using their first electronically recorded blood test results and vital signs: a cross-sectional studyFaisal, Muhammad; Scally, Andy J.; Jackson, N.; Richardson, D.; Beatson, K.; Howes, R.; Speed, K.; Menon, M.; Daws, J.; Dyson, J.; et al. (2018-12)Objectives There are no established mortality risk equations specifically for emergency medical patients who are admitted to a general hospital ward. Such risk equations may be useful in supporting the clinical decision-making process. We aim to develop and externally validate a computer-aided risk of mortality (CARM) score by combining the first electronically recorded vital signs and blood test results for emergency medical admissions. Design Logistic regression model development and external validation study. Setting Two acute hospitals (Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust Hospital (NH)—model development data; York Hospital (YH)—external validation data). Participants Adult (aged ≥16 years) medical admissions discharged over a 24-month period with electronic National Early Warning Score(s) and blood test results recorded on admission. Results The risk of in-hospital mortality following emergency medical admission was 5.7% (NH: 1766/30 996) and 6.5% (YH: 1703/26 247). The C-statistic for the CARM score in NH was 0.87 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.88) and was similar in an external hospital setting YH (0.86, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.87) and the calibration slope included 1 (0.97, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). Conclusions We have developed a novel, externally validated CARM score with good performance characteristics for estimating the risk of in-hospital mortality following an emergency medical admission using the patient’s first, electronically recorded, vital signs and blood test results. Since the CARM score places no additional data collection burden on clinicians and is readily automated, it may now be carefully introduced and evaluated in hospitals with sufficient informatics infrastructure.
Understanding and applying practitioner and patient views on the implementation of a novel automated Computer-Aided Risk Score (CARS) predicting the risk of death following emergency medical admission to hospital: qualitative studyDyson, J.; Marsh, C.; Jackson, N.; Richardson, D.; Faisal, Muhammad; Scally, Andy J.; Mohammad, Mohammad A. (2019-04)Objectives The Computer-Aided Risk Score (CARS) estimates the risk of death following emergency admission to medical wards using routinely collected vital signs and blood test data. Our aim was to elicit the views of healthcare practitioners (staff) and service users and carers (SU/C) on (1) the potential value, unintended consequences and concerns associated with CARS and practitioner views on (2) the issues to consider before embedding CARS into routine practice. Setting This study was conducted in two National Health Service (NHS) hospital trusts in the North of England. Both had in-house information technology (IT) development teams, mature IT infrastructure with electronic National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and were capable of integrating NEWS with blood test results. The study focused on emergency medical and elderly admissions units. There were 60 and 39 acute medical/elderly admissions beds at the two NHS hospital trusts. Participants We conducted eight focus groups with 45 healthcare practitioners and two with 11 SU/Cs in two NHS acute hospitals. Results Staff and SU/Cs recognised the potential of CARS but were clear that the score should not replace or undermine clinical judgments. Staff recognised that CARS could enhance clinical decision-making/judgments and aid communication with patients. They wanted to understand the components of CARS and be reassured about its accuracy but were concerned about the impact on intensive care and blood tests. Conclusion Risk scores are widely used in healthcare, but their development and implementation do not usually involve input from practitioners and SU/Cs. We contributed to the development of CARS by eliciting views of staff and SU/Cs who provided important, often complex, insights to support the development and implementation of CARS to ensure successful implementation in routine clinical practice.