Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37355577›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2023

SPICT as a predictive tool for risk of 1-year health degradation and death in older patients admitted to the emergency department: a bicentric cohort study in Belgium.

Delphine Bourmorck, Marie de Saint-Hubert, Marianne Desmedt, Ruth Piers, Julien Flament, Isabelle De Brauwer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Prevalence and long-term outcomes of patients with life-limiting illness admitted to intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Delphine BourmorckInstitut de Recherche Santé et Société, Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium. delphine.bourmorck@uclouvain.be.
Marie de Saint-HubertInstitut de Recherche Santé et Société, Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium.
Marianne DesmedtCliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium.
Ruth PiersDepartment of Geriatrics, Ghent University Hospital, C. Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, Gent, 9000, Belgium.
Julien FlamentCentre Hospitalier Universitaire - UCL - Namur, Avenue Gaston Thérasse 1, Yvoir, 5530, Belgium.
Isabelle De BrauwerInstitut de Recherche Santé et Société, Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, 30, Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium.

Funding

Koning Boudewijnstichting none
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder patients are increasingly showing multi-comorbidities, including advanced chronic diseases. When admitted to the emergency department (ED), the decision to pursue life-prolonging treatments or to initiate a palliative care approach is a challenge for clinicians. We test for the first time the diagnostic accuracy of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) in the ED to identify older patients at risk of deteriorating and dying, and timely address palliative care needs.

methodsWe conducted a prospective bicentric cohort study on 352 older patients (≥ 75 years) admitted to two EDs in Belgium between December 2019 and March 2020 and between August and November 2020. SPICT (French version, 2019) variables were collected during the patients' admission to the ED, along with socio-demographic, medical and functional data. The palliative profile was defined as a positive SPICT assessment. Survival, symptoms and health degradation (≥ 1 point in ADL Katz score or institutionalisation and death) were followed at 12 months by phone. Main accuracy measures were sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios (LR) as well as cox regression, survival analysis using the Kaplan Meier method, and ordinal regression.

resultsOut of 352 patients included in the study (mean age 83 ± 5.5 years, 43% male), 167 patients (47%) had a positive SPICT profile. At one year follow up, SPICT positive patients presented significantly more health degradation (72%) compared with SPICT negative patients (35%, p < 0.001). SPICT positivity was correlated with 1-year health degradation (OR 4.9; p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of SPICT to predict health degradation were 0.65 (95%CI, 0.57-0.73) and 0.72 (95%CI, 0.64-0.80) respectively, with a negative LR of 0.48 (95%CI, 0.38-0.60) and a positive LR of 2.37 (1.78-3.16). The survival time was shorter in SPICT positive patients than in SPICT negative ones (p < 0.001), the former having a higher 1-year mortality rate (HR = 4.21; p < 0.001).

conclusionsSPICT successfully identifies older patients at high risk of health degradation and death. It can support emergency clinicians to identify older patients with a palliative profile and subsequently initiate a palliative care approach with a discussion on goals of care.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalPalliative CareAgedAged, 80 and overBelgiumCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesEmergency DepartmentOlder patientsPalliative CarePrognosisSPICT

Identifiers

PMID37355577
PMCPMC10290336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.