Skip to main content
Download PDF

Elderly patients with non-specific complaints at the emergency department have a high risk for admission and 30-days mortality

BMC Geriatrics volume 24, Article number: 5 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Older adults have complex medical needs that causes increased use of resources at the emergency department (ED). The prevalence of non-specific complaint (NSC) as a chief-complaint in the ED is common among older adults and is not prioritized even though possibly having worse clinical outcome. The objective was to study hospital admission and mortality for older adults visiting the ED with NSC compared to specific complaints such as dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain.

Methods

A retrospective observational study of older adults visiting the ED with NSC and specific complaints; dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain was performed. Chief-complaint were collected from electronic medical records. Fatigue, confusion, non-specific complaints, generalized weakness and risk of falling were defined as non-specific complaint (NSC) when registered as chief-complaint at the ED. Admission rate and 30-days mortality were the primary outcomes.

Results

A total of 4927 patients were included in the study based on chief-complaint; patients with chest pain 1599 (32%), dyspnea 1343 (27%), abdominal pain 1460 (30%) and NSC 525 (11%). Patients with dyspnea and NSC had the highest hospital admission rate 79% vs 70% compared to patients with chest pain (63%) and abdominal pain (61%) (p =  < 0.001). Patients with NSC had a mean LOS 4.7 h at the ED which was significantly higher compared to chest pain, dyspnea and abdominal pain. Mean bed-days for the whole population was 4.2 days compared to patients with NSC who had a mean LOS of 5.6 days. NSC and dyspnea were both associated with the highest 30-day mortality.

Conclusion

Older patients who present with NSC at the ED are associated with a high risk for admission and 30-days mortality. In addition, patients with NSC have a longer LOS at the ED, a high admission rate and the highest number of bed-days once admitted. This study indicates that ED staff should be more vigilant when an elderly patient presents with NSC at the ED. Further studies and guidelines are needed to improve the management of these individuals.

Peer Review reports

Background

Chest pain, dyspnea and abdominal pain are all specified symptoms frequently appearing at the Emergency Department (ED) that can be caused by a limited number of possible diagnoses. In those patients having these specific chief-complaints, there are usually protocols and work-up programs that can be followed and support healthcare decisions [1,2,3]. However, there are also non-specific complaints (NSC) that appear at the ED such as fatigue, generalized weakness, altered mental status, failure to eat and drink, reduced mobility and falling where ED protocols usually do not apply [4, 5]. Studies have shown that NSC are frequent among patients at the ED and highest among older adults [4, 6]. Older adults often have multiple co-morbidities which can disguise classical signs and symptoms as well as age-related physiological changes such as failure to develop fever and lack of chest pain when having a heart attack which may result in NSC in a situation when deteriorating [7, 8].

Older adults have more complex medical needs that consequently results in longer waiting time at the ED and increased use of resources [9,10,11,12,13]. The risk of adverse events for elderly patients increases with length of stay (LOS) at the ED [14, 15]. Older patients with NSC often appear in the ED, and even though this can mean worse clinical outcome and longer LOS, they are still a patient category that is usually not prioritized [16,17,18,19,20,21]. NSC are one of the most challenging conditions for an ED-physician since there are not any specific protocols to follow and the cause of NSC can be caused by everything from life threatening conditions, lack of home health care or natural aging [4, 20, 22].

The aim of this study was to compare older adults with NSC at the ED with patients with specific chief-complaints such as dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain regarding admission rate and 30-day mortality.

Methods

Setting and design

This retrospective observational study was conducted with data of older adults ≥ 65 years of age visiting one of the ED in Region Halland (RH) located on the southwest of Sweden. Within RH, there are three acute care hospitals, 40 inpatient wards, two emergency departments and 30 outpatient specialized clinics. The study period was between 1st January 2016 and 31st December 2016. During 2016, a total of 314,784 individuals lived in RH. The proportion of individuals aged ≥ 65 years were 71,688 (23%). The data collection was generated from the Regional Healthcare Information Platform (RHIP) provided of RH. RHIP database that contains all information from primary and secondary healthcare including all electronic medical records, assessment instruments and examinations [23]. All patients visiting the ED are triaged according to Rapid Emergency Triage and Treatment System (RETTS) and chief-complaint are registered data were retrieved from RHIP [24].

Patients and selection

A total of 15,528 (22%) individuals aged ≥ 65 years visited the ED in RH at least one time during 2016. In the study, there were 4927 individuals who were ≥ 65 years of age visiting the ED with NSC, dyspnea, chest pain or abdominal pain. For patients with multiple visits to the ED only the first visit during the study period was registered to minimize data deviations. Trauma was the number one reason for ED-visit but was excluded in this study based on the broad variety in symptoms and severity level. Dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain were then selected based on being the top three reasons for visit. Included in NSC were the terms fatigue, altered mental status, falling, generalized weakness and non-specific complaints. Figure 1 shows a flow chart of inclusion in the study.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart inclusion in the study. Note: n = number, ED = emergency department, NSC = non-specific complaint

Full size image

Data collection

The data variables extracted were age, gender, comorbidities before visits to the ED, chief-complaint for ED-visit, LOS at ED, admission rate, in-hospital LOS and 30-days mortality. Comorbidities that each included patient had before their first ED-visit during 2016 were collected. All diagnoses were registered according to the International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10). The most common diagnosis´ were then categorized into the following groups; hypertension, ischemic heart disease (IHD), atrial fibrillation (AF), heart failure (HF), cerebrovascular insult (CVI), diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), musculoskeletal pain, psychiatric disorders and malignancy as described in Appendix 1. Patients with none of the above listed diagnosis were categorized as previously healthy. Patients were also categorized according to their health status if they were previously healthy, had diagnosis from 1–3 diagnostic groups or diagnosis from ≥ 4 diagnostic groups.

Definitions

The chief-complaint for ED-visits were collected from electronic medical records. Fatigue, confusion, non-specific complaints, generalized weakness and risk of falling was defined as NSC when registered as chief-complaint at the ED visit. All other complaints were classified as specific complaints.

Outcome measures

The primary outcome measures were hospital admissions and 30 days mortality. The secondary outcome measure was LOS at ED, demographic characteristics, previous health condition for the older adults that visits the ED and in-hospital LOS.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients’ demographics. Continuous variables were described as means + standard deviation (SD) and analyzed using Student’s t-test and One-way-ANOVA. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-2 tests and summarized using frequency and percentages.

According to the WHO classification, patients ≥ 65 years of age were classified as older adults and then categorized into three different groups; 65–74 years, 75–84 years and ≥ 85 years [25]. The number of diagnostic groups was registered for each individual patient and based on this, the patients were categorized according to their health status if they were previously healthy, had diagnosis from 1–3 diagnostic groups or diagnosis from ≥ 4 diagnostic groups. LOS at the ED were categorized as < 4 h or > 4 h [26].

Multivariate regression analysis for hospital admission were performed adjusted for the complaints; NSC, dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain. The risk for hospital admission was analyzed overall and separated according to age-groups, comorbidities and time at ED. The age-groups were 65–74 years, 75–84 years and ≥ 85 years. The comorbidities were grouped as previously healthy, 1–3 and ≥ 4 comorbidities. The time at ED was grouped as < 4 or > 4 h at ED. There was a Cox regression analysis for 30 days mortality for NSC, dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain that were adjusted for gender, age, comorbidities, time at ED, revisit within 72 h from first ED visit, hospital admission at index, bed days > 6 days when admitted and having readmission within 30 days. There were no missing values in the data collection.

A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 27, Armonk, New York, USA.

Results

A total of 15,528 patients aged ≥ 65 years visited the ED in RH during 2016. Of these, 4927 (32%) were included in the study based on chief-complaint. The top 10 reasons for ED-visits are shown in Table 1. The distribution of chief-complaints was 1599 (32%) patients with chest pain, 1343 (27%) with dyspnea, 1460 (30%) with abdominal pain and 525 (11%) with NSC.

Table 1 Top 10 reasons for ED-visit in RH during the year of 2016
Full size table

Descriptive statistics of demographic data are shown in Table 2. Patients with NSC had a mean age of 80 years. The patients who sought for dyspnea had a mean age of 80 years, chest pains 77 years and abdominal pain 78 years (p = 0.001). Patients with NSC had a mean LOS of 4,7 h at the ED which was significantly higher compared to chest pain, dyspnea and abdominal pain. Mean bed-days for the whole population was 4.2 days compared to patients with NSC who had a mean LOS of 5.6 days.

Table 2 Illustrate demography of the study population that made visits to the ED during 2016 with NSC, dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain. And the association between type of complaint and clinical outcome
Full size table

Patients with dyspnea and NSC had the highest hospital admission rate 79% vs 70% compared to patients with chest pain (63%) and abdominal pain (61%) (p =  < 0.001) which is shown in Table 2.

The overall 30-days mortality in the total study group was 6% where patients with dyspnea had the highest mortality rate of 10% followed by patients with NSC 9%, abdominal pain 5% and chest pain 2% which is displayed in Table 2.

A multivariate regression analysis for hospital admission adjusted for age, previous health conditions and LOS at the ED had an Odds ratio 1.6 (Confidence Interval [CI] 1.27–2.00) for dyspnea compared to NSC. The analysis for hospital admission is also separated for age, previous health conditions and LOS at the ED, illustrated in Table 3.

Table 3 Risk of hospital admissions adjusted for each complaint regarding overall risk and separated by age groups, number of diagnoses/comorbidities and time at Emergency Department
Full size table

Overall Cox regression for 30-days mortality with NSC as reference showed a Hazard ratio of 1.12 (CI 0.80–1.58) for dyspnea, 0.23 (CI 0.15–0.36) and 0.53 (CI 0.36–0.77) for chest pain and abdominal pain respectively. Table 4 shows an adjusted Cox regression model and Hazard ratio for NSC, dyspnea, chest pain and abdominal pain.

Table 4 Cox-regression 30-days mortality
Full size table

Discussion

Among older adults visiting the ED, those with NSC and dyspnea had the highest age. NSC as the chief-complaint was associated with a higher rate of ED duration > 4 h and readmission within 72 h. Patients with NSC had the longest in-hospital LOS. Older adults with dyspnea in the ED were associated with the highest hospital admission rate followed by NSC which had a higher hospital admission rate compared to patients presenting with chest and abdominal pain. Earlier studies have shown a similar high admission rate for elderly patients with chief complaint dyspnea and chest pain [27]. The high admission rate for geriatric patients may be a sign of the difficulties to distinguish between life-threatening conditions or the sign of chronic geriatric diseases at the ED. The 30-day mortality rate for patients with dyspnea and NSC were significantly higher compared to patients having chest pain or abdominal pain at the ED.

The present study has shown that patients in the ED with NSC have a high average age, which is consistent with other studies [4,5,6]. Increasing age entails an increased risk of hospital admission and likewise the occurrence of ≥ 4 comorbidities. LOS at ED ≥ 4 h was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization which may seem odd. It was likely a certain degree of selection and that long LOS in the ED could be used as an observation time in practice.

In this study, 11% of the study cohort were defined as having NSC as their chief-complaint and in comparison, previous studies have shown that up to 20% of older adults at the ED present with NSC [28]. The difference may be due to the lack of international definition of non-specific complaints. Most commonly fatigue, generalized weakness, altered mental status, failure to eat and drink, reduced mobility and falling are considered NSC but sometimes these symptoms are referred to as the geriatric syndrome at the ED [20]. Patients with NSC have a poor clinical outcome and are often prioritized as low acuity at the ED. Studies show that screening for frailty could be one useful parameter to improve triage for older adults at the ED. Frailty appears to be of more use than chronological age when predicting outcome for geriatric trauma patients [29, 30]. Several studies have shown that a geriatric approach at the ED will shorten LOS at the ED and in-hospital LOS once admitted [31, 32].

The chief complaint with the highest risk for hospital admission was dyspnea followed by NSC. Still, NSC was associated with higher admission risk compared to both chest and abdominal pain and this finding was regardless of age group, degree of comorbidity and time at ED. Older patients with NSC were associated with a significantly higher 30-days mortality rate compared to patients with chest pain and abdominal pain and the mortality rate was comparable to patients with dyspnea, these data’s are comparable with previous studies [4, 33,34,35]. Chest pain as chief complaint will be prioritized higher at the ED compared to NSC. This study is in line with earlier studies and shows that patients with NSC have a higher admission rate and mortality rate than patients presenting with chest pain at the ED [36]. In addition, patients with NSC have a longer LOS at the ED, a high admission rate and the highest number of bed-days once admitted. Despite the lower number of patients with NSC in this study the 30-days mortality rate were in line with previous studies [4].

These results demonstrate that NSC in older adults can be difficult to assess for ED staff even though these individuals may be at significant risk for hospital requirements and 30-day mortality. There may be a need to improve routines regarding the handling of this patient group in the ED and previous study have reported there are limitations in existing risk stratification instruments for older adults visiting the ED [37].

Conclusion

Older patients who present with NSC at the ED are associated with a high risk for hospital admission and 30-days mortality. In addition, patients with NSC compared to patients with SC have a longer LOS at the ED, a high admission rate and the highest number of bed-days once admitted. This study indicates that ED staff should be more vigilant when an elderly patient presents with NSC at the ED. Further research is needed to approach how to best care for older patients with NSC to reduce morbidity and mortality.

Limitations

In the study, it is not possible to evaluate the degree of acuity or morbidity in terms other than the number of comorbidities. Nor can frailty be assessed, which is likely to be of decisive importance in this patient group. Trauma is a common diagnosis in the ED and was not included as a chief complaint in this study. The intention was to identify NSC and compare them with chief complaints that are judged to be relatively serious in the ED and where there are guidelines on how these patients should be managed at ED. Trauma has a wide variety of conditions and was not assessed being not appropriate in this regard.

The terminologies fatigue, altered mental status, falling, generalized weakness and non-specific complaints to define NSC could have been somewhat restrictive and leading to lower acceptance rate. However, these chief-complaint used compiled to a high rate compared to others and the purpose was not to overlap to specific complaint associated with specific diseases such as vertigo and neurology.

It should be emphasized that the results in this study are only associations, and it is not possible to draw any conclusions regarding causality.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the data is retrieved from patient’s hospital records which is included in the Swedish Health Care act which applies to Swedish secrecy act according to Swedish legislation. The data will be shared on reasonable request to the corresponding author.

References

  1. Gupta M, Tabas JA, Kohn MA. Presenting complaint among patients with Myocardial Infarction who present to an urban, public hospital emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;40(2):180–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. American Thoracic Society. Dyspnea. Mechanisms, assessment, and management: a consensus statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;159(1):321–40.

  3. Kartal M, Eray O, Erdogru T, Yilmaz S. Prospective validation of a current algorithm including bedside US performed by emergency physicians for patients with acute flank pain suspected for renal colic. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(5):341–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Nemec M, Koller MT, Nickel CH, Maile S, Winterhalder C, Karrer C, et al. Patients presenting to the emergency department with non-specific complaints: the basel non-specific complaints (BANC) study. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(3):284–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Djärv T, Castrén M, Mårtenson L, Kurland L. Decreased general condition in the emergency department: high in-hospital mortality and a broad range of discharge diagnoses. Eur J Emerg Med. 2015;22(4):241–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sauter TC, Capaldo G, Hoffmann M, Birrenbach T, Hautz SC, Kammer JE, et al. Non-specific complaints at emergency department presentation result in unclear diagnoses and lengthened hospitalization: a prospective observational study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2018;26(1):60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Wester AL, Dunlop O, Melby KK, Dahle UR, Wyller TB. Age-related differences in symptoms, diagnosis and prognosis of bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2013;13:346.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Wong CK, White HD. Recognising painless heart attacks. Heart. 2002;87(1):3–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. George G, Jell C, Todd BS. Effect of population ageing on emergency department speed and efficiency: a historical perspective from a district general hospital in the UK. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(5):379–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Rauch J, Denter M, Hubner U. Use of emergency departments by Frail Elderly patients: temporal patterns and case complexity. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019;267:215–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gentili S, Emberti Gialloreti L, Riccardi F, Scarcella P, Liotta G. Predictors of emergency room access and not urgent emergency room access by the frail older adults. Front Public Health. 2021;9:721634.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Erwander K, Ivarsson K, Landin-Olsson M, Agvall B. Pre-hospital conditions affecting the hospitalization risk in older adults at the emergency department. J Geriatric Emerg Med. 2022;3(3):6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aminzadeh F, Dalziel WB. Older adults in the emergency department: a systematic review of patterns of use, adverse outcomes, and effectiveness of interventions. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39(3):238–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Choi W, Woo SH, Kim DH, Lee JY, Lee WJ, Jeong S, et al. Prolonged length of stay in the emergency department and mortality in critically ill elderly patients with infections: a retrospective multicenter study. Emerg Med Int. 2021;2021:9952324.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Ackroyd-Stolarz S, Read Guernsey J, Mackinnon NJ, Kovacs G. The association between a prolonged stay in the emergency department and adverse events in older patients admitted to hospital: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(7):564–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Singer AJ, Thode HC Jr, Viccellio P, Pines JM. The association between length of emergency department boarding and mortality. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(12):1324–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bo M, Bonetto M, Bottignole G, Porrino P, Coppo E, Tibaldi M, et al. Length of stay in the emergency department and occurrence of delirium in older medical patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016;64(5):1114–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Limpawattana P, Phungoen P, Mitsungnern T, Laosuangkoon W, Tansangworn N. Atypical presentations of older adults at the emergency department and associated factors. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016;62:97–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hofman FvdH MR, Sierevelt IN, Tulner CR. Elderly patients with an atypical presentation of Illness in the emergency department. Neth J Med. 2017;75(6):241–6.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rutschmann OT, Chevalley T, Zumwald C, Luthy C, Vermeulen B, Sarasin FP. Pitfalls in the emergency department triage of frail elderly patients without specific complaints. Swiss Med Wkly. 2005;135(9–10):145–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ivic R, Kurland L, Vicente V, Castren M, Bohm K. Serious conditions among patients with non-specific chief complaints in the pre-hospital setting: a retrospective cohort study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2020;28(1):74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Chew WM, Birnbaumer DM. Evaluation of the elderly patient with weakness: an evidence based approach. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 1999;17(1):265–78 (x).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ashfaq A, Lönn S, Nilsson H, Eriksson JA, Kwatra J, Yasin ZM, et al. Data resource profile: regional healthcare information platform in Halland, Sweden. Int J Epidemiol. 2020;49(3):738–739f.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Widgren BR. RETTS: akutsjukvård direkt. Lund: Studentlitteratur; 2012.

  25. Lee SB, Oh JH, Park JH, Choi SP, Wee JH. Differences in youngest-old, middle-old, and oldest-old patients who visit the emergency department. Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2018;5(4):249–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Socialstyrelsen. Väntetider och patientflöden på akutmottagningar Rapport december 2015.pdf. 2015.

  27. Holzmann M, Petrini L, Hasselström J, Wändell P, Bylund P, Ruge T. Elderly seeking emergency care should receive special care. Contact patterns and underlying diagnoses in retrospective cross-sectional study. Lakartidningen. 2015;112, DFD4.

  28. Vanpee D, Swine C, Vandenbossche P, Gillet JB. Epidemiological profile of geriatric patients admitted to the emergency department of a university hospital localized in a rural area. Eur J Emerg Med. 2001;8(4):301–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Boulton AJ, Peel D, Rahman U, Cole E. Evaluation of elderly specific pre-hospital trauma triage criteria: a systematic review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2021;29(1):127.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Joseph B, Pandit V, Zangbar B, Kulvatunyou N, Hashmi A, Green DJ, et al. Superiority of frailty over age in predicting outcomes among geriatric trauma patients: a prospective analysis. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(8):766–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wallis M, Marsden E, Taylor A, Craswell A, Broadbent M, Barnett A, et al. The geriatric emergency department intervention model of care: a pragmatic trial. BMC Geriatr. 2018;18(1):297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Blomaard LC, Speksnijder C, Lucke JA, de Gelder J, Anten S, Schuit SCE, et al. Geriatric screening, triage urgency, and 30-day mortality in older emergency department patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020;68(8):1755–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Venditti M, Falcone M, Corrao S, Licata G, Serra P. Outcomes of patients hospitalized with community-acquired, health care-associated, and hospital-acquired pneumonia. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(1):19–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Safwenberg U, Terént A, Lind L. The emergency department presenting complaint as predictor of in-hospital fatality. Eur J Emerg Med. 2007;14(6):324–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lucke JA, Mooijaart SP, Conroy S, Blomaard LC, De Groot B, Nickel CH. Mortality risk for different presenting complaints amongst older patients assessed with the Manchester triage system. Eur Geriatr Med. 2022;13(2):323–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Raven W, van den Hoven EMP, Gaakeer MI, Ter Avest E, Sir O, Lameijer H, et al. The association between presenting complaints and clinical outcomes in emergency department patients of different age categories. Eur J Emerg Med. 2022;29(1):33–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Carpenter CR, Shelton E, Fowler S, Suffoletto B, Platts-Mills TF, Rothman RE, et al. Risk factors and screening instruments to predict adverse outcomes for undifferentiated older emergency department patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2015;22(1):1–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Open access funding provided by Lund University. We also wish to thank the Gun and Bertil Stohne's Foundation (non-profit, Sweden) and the Stiftelsen Sigurd och Elsa Goljes minne (non-profit, Sweden) for project grants that made the study possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Karin Erwander, Kjell Ivarsson & Mona Landin Olsson

  2. Department of Research and Development, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden

    Björn Agvall

Authors
  1. Karin Erwander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kjell Ivarsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mona Landin Olsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Björn Agvall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KE is a major contributor to writing the manuscript. KE, BA and KI interpreted the statistical analyses. BA, KI and MLO supported writing the manuscript. BA was responsible for data collection. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin Erwander.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was performed in accordance with the international ethical standards and was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority, reference number 2016/20.

The requirement for informed consent was waived by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority since the study was openly announced to the public on Region Halland´s website and there are instructions on how to opt out of participation in a present study. Simultaneously, the study is retrospective, and the data is retrieved pseudonymized and none of the researchers can deduce and identity among the participating individuals. Accordingly, the assessment has been that none of the included individuals has been exposed to the risk of being exposed regarding personal data or harm. All data provided for this study are treated confidentially and the results are presented at group level so that no individuals can be identified.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Appendix 1.

Describes diagnostic groups categorized according to the International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Erwander, K., Ivarsson, K., Olsson, M.L. et al. Elderly patients with non-specific complaints at the emergency department have a high risk for admission and 30-days mortality. BMC Geriatr 24, 5 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04621-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-023-04621-7

Keywords

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us