Multi-Year Retrospective Analysis of Mortality and Readmissions Correlated with STOPP/START and the American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria Applied to Calgary Hospital Admissions
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: The goals of this retrospective cohort study of 129,443 persons admitted to Calgary acute care hospitals from 2013 to 2021 were to ascertain correlations of “potentially inappropriate medications” (PIMs), “potential prescribing omissions” (PPOs), and other risk factors with readmissions and mortality. Methods: Processing and analysis codes were built in Oracle Database 19c (PL/SQL), R, and Excel. Results: The percentage of patients dying during their hospital stay rose from 3.03% during the first admission to 7.2% during the sixth admission. The percentage of patients dying within 6 months of discharge rose from 9.4% after the first admission to 24.9% after the sixth admission. Odds ratios were adjusted for age, gender, and comorbidities, and for readmission, they were the post-admission number of medications (1.16; 1.12–1.12), STOPP PIMs (1.16; 1.15–1.16), AGS Beers PIMs (1.11; 1.11–1.11), and START omissions not corrected with a prescription (1.39; 1.35–1.42). The odds ratios for readmissions for the second to thirty-ninth admission were consistently higher if START PPOs were not corrected for the second (1.41; 1.36–1.46), third (1.41;1.35–1.48), fourth (1.35; 1.28–1.44), fifth (1.38; 1.28–1.49), sixth (1.47; 1.34–1.62), and seventh admission to thirty-ninth admission (1.23; 1.14–1.34). The odds ratios for mortality were post-admission number of medications (1.04; 1.04–1.05), STOPP PIMs (0.99; 0.96–1.00), AGS Beers PIMs (1.08; 1.07–1.08), and START omissions not corrected with a prescription (1.56; 1.50–1.63). START omissions for all admissions corrected with a prescription by a hospital physician correlated with a dramatic reduction in mortality (0.51; 0.49–0.53) within six months of discharge. This was also true for the second (0.52; 0.50–0.55), fourth (0.56; 0.52–0.61), fifth (0.63; 0.57–0.68), sixth (0.68; 0.61–0.76), and seventh admission to thirty-ninth admission (0.71; 0.65–0.78). Conclusions: “Potential prescribing omissions” (PPOs) consisted mostly of needed cardiac medications. These omissions occurred before the first admission of this cohort, and many persisted through their readmissions and discharges. Therefore, these omissions should be corrected in the community before admission by family physicians, in the hospital by hospital physicians, and if they continue after discharge by teams of family physicians, pharmacists, and nurses. These community teams should also meet with patients and focus on patients’ understanding of their illnesses, medications, PPOs, and ability for self-care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle