A Modified Screening Tool to Evaluate Risk of Unanticipated Return Visits to the Emergency Department in the Geriatric Population
2020
- 354Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage354
- Downloads221
- Abstract Views133
Artifact Description
Purpose: To compare the Modified Screening Tool for Identifying at Risk Seniors (mSTIRS) against the Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST) and the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) for predictive value and assess the relationship between presenting complaint with unanticipated return visit (URV) occurrence in geriatric patients.Design: A prospective, observational study conducted at a large academic medical center. Descriptive statistics and psychometric analyses were used to analyze the association between demographics, clinical data, and to evaluate the modified screening tool.Methods: 38 geriatric participants in the Emergency Department (ED) were enrolled and 21 completed the study. The screening tools were administered after triage and patients were contacted 72-hours post-discharge from the ED for URV evaluation. Results: The mSTIRS demonstrated greater sensitivity (87.5%), specificity (57.1%), and predictive value (PPV 50%; NPV 88.9%) than the TRST and ISAR. No association was found between URV and presenting complaint (X2(6, n=21) = 3.161, p = 0.788).Conclusions: The mSTIRS screening tool better identified geriatric patients at risk for unanticipated 72-hour return visits to the ED compared to the TRST and ISAR. Additional testing with a larger sample is needed to replicate results and determine the validity of this modified screening tool.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know