Skip to main content

Blog

Epic Deterioration Index: Identifying Patient Acuity

Northwestern Medicine has evaluated various tools and processes to detect patient deterioration sooner and one of these tools is Epic’s Deterioration Index (DI). DI is a predictive analytics model that promotes a proactive approach to identifying patient acuity. Epic’s data science team has developed and validated this model through more than 100,000 patient encounters across multiple organizations! After piloting, NM achieved a 15 to 20% decline in unplanned ICU transfers!

Epic’s DI improves on previous warning systems by including additional data points:

A risk score from zero to 100 is calculated every 15 minutes, incorporating all new information entered into Epic.

Consider adding this tool (Deterioration-Index-Patient-List-Column) to your Epic columns and share any feedback you have via this form to help further improve this resource!

Updates to Cervical Cancer Screening

The American Cancer Society (ACS) recently released updated guideline recommendations for cervical cancer screening. Please see the highlights below!

Rationale:

  • Persistent high-risk HPV infections, predominantly HPV16 and HPV18, are responsible for nearly all cervical cancers.
  • The goal of cervical cancer screening is to detect and treat precancerous lesions and early stage invasive cancer.
  • A growing portion of the population is vaccinated for HPV and cytology-based screening is less efficient in this population.
  • Women <25 years have a low incidence of cervical cancer and high incidence of transient HPV infections.

Key Definitions:

  • Primary HPV test: HPV testing designated for HPV testing alone. There are currently two FDA approved tests for stand-alone HPV testing.
  • Cotest: Combines cytology (i.e. Pap smear) and HPV testing.

Recommendations:

Table adapted from Fontham ETH, Wolf AMD, Church TR, Etzioni R, Flowers CR, Herzig A, Guerra CE, Oeffinger KC, Shih YT, Walter LC, Kim JJ, Andrews KS, DeSantis CE, Fedewa SA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Saslow D, Wender RC, Smith RA. Cervical cancer screening for individuals at average risk: 2020 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Sep;70(5):321-346. doi: 10.3322/caac.21628. Epub 2020 Jul 30. PMID: 32729638.

 

Articles: Updated ACS Guidelines 

Naloxone for Patient at High Risk for Opioid Overdose

Recent CDC guidelines have recommended considering naloxone for patients at high risk of an opioid overdose. Drs. Welter, Blankenship and Eisenstadt have done great work at Northwestern to raise awareness regarding this potentially lifesaving intervention. Please see their excellent tip sheet regarding the prescription of naloxone for those at risk for opioid overdose. A link to the current CDC guidelines and an educational brochure for patients can be seen below.

CDC Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids

Educational Brochure For Patients

Diabetic Foot Exam

Since we’re on the topic of diabetic foot ulcer, this is a friendly reminder to perform a yearly foot exam on all patients with diabetes.

Keep an eye out for the “Best Practice” reminder to see when a patient is due for an annual foot exam.

Easily document your foot exam with the dot phrase .diabeticfootexam

 

Diabetic Foot Infections: Who Manages the Patient?

Diabetes is one of the most common and costly chronic diseases in the U.S, affecting more than 22.3 million people and costing more than $245 billion in 2012. Diabetic foot infections are a major complication of diabetes, affecting as many as 25% of patients with diabetes and resulting in $9-$13 billion in costs every year.

A multi-disciplinary group at NMH, consisting of infectious disease specialists, vascular surgery, orthopedic surgery, physical therapy, and hospital medicine was established to streamline diabetic foot infection management, optimize care, and to maximize the likelihood of wound healing.

The following algorithm was established for optimal management:

Diabetic Foot Infection Algorithm

 

References:

  • Rice JB, Desai U, Cummings AKG. Burden of diabetic foot ulcers for Medicare and Private Insurers. Diabetes Care 2014;37(3):651-8.
  • Drs. Kari Kreuger, Shannon Galvin, and Ajay Bhasin, “Inpatient Diabetic Foot Infection Management.”

Aspiration Pneumonia: Is Anaerobic Coverage Necessary?

Antimicrobial Stewardship  

An elderly patient presents with fevers and new oxygen requirement. Labs reveal a leukocytosis and chest x-ray reveals a lower right lung consolidation. You are concerned about an aspiration pneumonia and instinctively choose a regimen with anaerobic coverage, but is anaerobic coverage necessary? A recent article by Dr. Vedamurthy and others published in the Journal of Hospital Medicine attempts to answer this question. 

Highlights 

  • Data regarding anaerobes as a major pathogen in aspiration pneumonia stems from studies in the 1970’s evaluating patients with presumed aspiration pneumonia. Many patients had complicated pneumonia with abscesses or pulmonary necrosis. 
  • More recent data in patients with uncomplicated aspiration pneumonia have shown aerobic gram-positive and/or gram-negative bacteria to be the predominant pathogenic organisms.  
  • Potential harms associated with unnecessary anerobic coverage include gut dysbiosis, higher incidences of antibiotic resistance organisms and C. difficile infections.  
  • Recommendations: Treat for CAP/HAP without specific anaerobic coverage unless patient have the following risk factors or findings:
    • Macroaspiration with severe periodontal disease 
    • Putrid sputum 
    • Prolonged illness (>7 days)
    • Lung abscess 
    • Empyema 

Article: 
Amar Vedamurthy, MD, MS, MRCP (UK), FACP, Iniya Rajendran, MD, MPH, Farrin Manian, MD, MPH, FACP, FIDSA, FSHEA, Things We Do for No Reason™: Routine Coverage of Anaerobes in Aspiration Pneumonia. J. Hosp. Med 2020;12;754-756. Published Online First September 23, 2020. doi:10.12788/jhm.3506 

Additional Resources:  

Mandell LA, Niederman MS. Aspiration Pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 14;380(7):651-663. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1714562. PMID: 30763196. 

FeNa and FeUrea: Can we avoid MDCalc?

On Monday’s morning report, we discussed the case of an elderly female presenting with hemoptysis and AKI. Part of our discussion focused on  FeNa and FeUrea. These tests are commonly ordered reflexively during evaluation of AKI, but are they the best use of hospital resources. A 2016 article by Dr. Pahwa and Dr. Sperati attempted to address this question.  

Key Points :

  • The initial studies investigating FeNa and FeUrea focused on select populations with small sample sizes. These findings are likely not reflective of the general inpatient population.  
  • FeNa and FeUrea often had minimal impact on the pre-test probability.  
  • Rather than obtaining FeNa and FeUrea, the authors suggest focusing on management: 
    • Fluid administration vs diuresis in the setting of suspected pre-renal AKI. 
    • Fluid administration in the setting of suspected ATI if hypovolemia is present. 
  • Urine sediment can help differentiate between ATN and pre-renal AKI, in addition to evaluating for other etiologies of AKI (glomerulonephritis and acute interstitial nephritis) .
  • FeNa can be helpful in the diagnosis of hepatorenal syndrome.  

Link to article: https://www.journalofhospitalmedicine.com/jhospmed/article/127988/urinary-excretion-indices-aki

Additional review article: https://cjasn.asnjournals.org/content/7/1/167

Telemetry Reviewed

As the COVID pandemic continues and flu season begins, proper utilization of hospital resources becomes a priority. We wanted to take a moment to highlight key components of the most recent American Health Association’s (AHA) 2017 recommendations regarding telemetry use. 

Cardiac conditions where telemetry is not required:

  1. Frequent PVC’s or non-sustained VT in the absence of other indications for arrhythmia monitoring telemetry may be considered, but is not required
  2. Known permanent atrial fibrillation with adequate rate control
    1. However, it may be considered if a medical condition is present that may affect rate  
  3. Asymptomatic, hemodynamically stable patients with bradycardia
  4. Asymptomatic patients with Wenckebach 
  5. Arrhythmia monitoring following a noncardiac surgery in an asymptomatic patients 
  6. Patients with an ICD or pacemaker without another indication for telemetry 

Non-Cardiac Indications for Telemetry 

  1. Arrhythmia monitoring 24-48 hours following a stroke. Prolonged arrhythmia monitoring may be considered in patients with cryptogenic stroke
  2. Patients with moderate to severe imbalance of potassium or magnesium 
  3. Patients with drug overdose until patient is “free of the influence of the drug” 

Of note, the author’s of the most recent guidelines found insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for the following populations: patients with pneumonia not requiring ICU level care, patients with a COPD exacerbation or patients on chronic hemodialysis. 

A more detailed report of the AHA’s current recommendations can be found here.

Please refer to the post on 11/17/2020 for a list of indications for telemetry at NMH!

Changes to troponin assay: from Troponin-I to High Sensitivity Troponin

Our troponin assay recently changed from Troponin-I (TnI) to High Sensitivity Troponin-I (hs-TnI). The new assay is approximately 4.5x more sensitive to the presence of Troponin in blood samples than the previous assay.  See below for the hs-TnI algorithm and critical value levels.

NM High Sensitivity Troponin Algorithm

How do the new hsTroponin values compare to our conventional assay?

Convert by a factor of 1000! eg 0.05 on the old scale is around 50 on the hsTroponin scale

-Sahil and contribution from Mike

Changes to Telemetry Order

The telemetry order now features time limits on telemetry duration depending on indication in an effort to reduce telemetry utilization once clinical status changes. Check out the expiration times for each indication below!