- Research
- Open access
- Published:
Predicting mortality in geriatric patients with fever in the emergency departments: a prospective validation study
BMC Geriatrics volume 24, Article number: 758 (2024)
Abstract
Objective
Emergency physicians are always faced with the challenge of choosing the appropriate disposition for elderly patients in order to ensure an acceptable care plan and effective use of resources. A clinical decision rule, Geriatric Fever Score (GFS) has been proposed but not validated to help ED physicians with decision-making. This rule employs leukocytosis, severe coma, and thrombocytopenia as predictors of 30-day mortality. Through our study determines the performance of this clinical prediction rule in a prospective study in a setting different from where it was developed.
Method and materials
In this prospective cohort study in a 1200-bed tertiary care, patients older than 65 years old who visited the ED with fever were enrolled. All elements of the rule were collected and the total score was calculated for each patient. Patients were also categorized as low risk (score 0–1) or high risk (score ≥ 2). Thirty-day follow-up was performed to determine the patient outcome (survival or mortality).
Results
A total of 296 patients were included in our final analysis. The mortality rate was 33.1% for patients with a Score of 0, 42.1% for a score of 1, 57.1% for a score of 2, and 100% for a score of 3. When divided into two risk groups, patients’ mortality rates were as follows: low risk group 37.9% and high-risk group 40.5%.
Conclusion
Our study showed that elderly patients who present to ED with fever and have a score of 2 or higher on the Geriatric Fever Score are at higher risk of mortality at 30 days.
Introduction
Although adults aged 65 and older represent about 8% of the general population, they account for approximately 28% of all emergency department (ED) visits [1]. In addition to the higher rate of ED utilization, elderly patients presenting to the ED are more likely to be hospitalized than younger patients (14.3% versus 4.7%) [2].
On the other hand, emergency admissions of elderly patients can be detrimental and bear many complications—during hospitalization or even after discharge—such as delirium, malnutrition, dehydration, infection, and falls [3]. The hospitalization of geriatric patients usually consumes many resources and results in higher costs. Therefore, ED physicians are always faced with the challenge of choosing the appropriate disposition for this group of patients to ensure an acceptable care plan and effective use of resources [4].
Predictors of poor outcomes in geriatric patients can be divided into two groups: factors about the vulnerability of the patient (such as multi-morbidity, cognitive dysfunction, and polypharmacy) and parameters reflecting the severity of the disease at admission time [5].
One of the most common causes of elderly ED visits is fever, comprising approximately 15% of all visits [6, 7].
Therefore, some studies have proposed decision rules based on mortality predictors to help ED physicians make optimum decisions on managing geriatric patients with fever. These include Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score, National Early Warning Score (NEWS), Dengue fever mortality Score, Mortality and bloodstream infections, and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) Criteria [8]. None of these prediction rules are specific to the geriatric population. Besides, there are other scores for predicting mortality in elderly patients [9]. These scores are not focused on patients presenting with fever. These include the Barthel Index, Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), and Geriatric influenza death (GID) score. Moreover, these rules often employ numerous variables that are not immediately available to emergency physicians, rendering them impractical in the ED setting [10].
Geriatric Fever Score (leukocytosis, severe coma, and thrombocytopenia) was first introduced in 2014 as a practical rule for this purpose. It was originally driven in a single tertiary care center in Taiwan through a retrospective study of 330 elderly patients presenting to ED [4]. It has not been externally validated and the retrospective nature of the study might have affected its results.
Through our study determines the performance of this clinical prediction rule in a prospective study in a setting different from where it was originally developed.
Methods
Study design and setting
This prospective cohort study was conducted in a 1200-bed tertiary care, university-affiliated medical center. The center provides care for approximately 100,000 patients in the ED per year, about 33% of whom are elderly.
Study population
Non-traumatic geriatric patients (≥ 65 years old) who visited the ED between 1 June 2021 and 1 June 2022 were enrolled through a convenience sampling method. The study was approved by the ethics committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR.TUMS.IKHC.REC.1399.122). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
The patients were assessed for eligibility if they had a fever, defined as a tympanic temperature > 37.2 C [11]. Patients were excluded if they left the hospital against medical advice or if they had missing data making it impossible to calculate the score.
Data collection and definition of variables
Two investigators (G.H., K.N.) collected data elements of the GFS (leukocytosis, severe coma, and thrombocytopenia). The level of consciousness on admission was recorded as the Glasgow Coma Scale score. All patients had complete blood counts within two hours of admission, checked with a Sysmex cell counter device. Every mortality predictor was given one score. Patients were then classified as low risk (those who scored 0–1) or high risk (those who scored ≥ 2). Investigators also logged age, sex, and past medical history.
Outcome measurement
We used all-cause 30-day mortality as the primary outcome in this study. The researchers (G.H. and K.N.) checked the hospital registration system to find any readmission or in-hospital mortality of patients during the follow-up period. If the patients were discharged before 30 days telephone follow-up was used for the evaluation of outcomes. For patients who had readmission with hospital registration system evaluated 30 day-mortality.
Data analysis
Categorical variables were presented as numbers (percentages) and compared by the chi-square test. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to assess the discrimination ability of our model (the geriatric fever score). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive (PPV and NPV), and positive and negative likelihood ratio (+ LR and –LR) values with 95% CI were reported by creating the two-by-two contingency tables. To calculate the diagnostic test performance, we used an online calculator (available at https://www.medcalc.org/calc/diagnostic_test.php). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA) was used for all statistical analysis. For sample size calculation, considering the area under the ROC curve for the Geriatric Fever Score of 0.73 as presented in the original study, with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 80%, we needed 358 patients to show the effect size of 0.12. While a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant to avert the risk of multiplicity, we used Bonferroni correction of the P-value to less than 0.001 for characteristic table test results using Chi-Square tests.
Results
We enrolled 343 patients during the study period. Nine patients were excluded because of insufficient data and 12 patients for leaving the hospital before 24 h. In addition, 26 patients were lost to follow up. Therefore, a total of 296 patients were entered into our final analysis. (Fig. 1) Half of the patient were above 75 years old. The baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1.
The mortality rate was 33.1% for patients with a Score of 0, 42.1% for a score of 1, 57.1% for a score of 2, and 100% for a score of 3. When divided into two risk groups, patients’ mortality rates were as follows: low risk group 37.9% and high-risk group 40.5% (Table 2).
The area under the ROC curve for the Geriatric Fever Score was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.52 -0.65), with statistically significant discrimination ability (p = 0.01) (Fig. 2).
The diagnostic performance of the GFS has been shown in Table 3.
Discussion
In this study, we tried to validate the GFS in predicting 30-day mortality of elderly patients who present to the ED with fever. The findings of our study showed that a GFS of ≤ 1 could predict with an acceptable sensitivity of 95% that the patient will have a 30-day survival. This can help emergency physicians in deciding to transfer patients to a general ward or discharge with close follow-up after treatment in the ED. According to a systematic review, qSOFA showed a lower sensitivity (56.39%) but a higher specificity (78.84%), whereas SIRS showed a higher sensitivity (74.58%) but a lower specificity (35.24%) for hospital and 30-day mortality in sepsis. These rules are the most practical rules for sepsis mortality but they are not specific for the geriatric group [12].
Geriatric patients presenting with an infection may have atypical symptoms, such as a decline in functional physical status or altered mental status, or both [1]. Several other studies have pointed to cognitive impairment as an important predictor of in- and out-of-hospital geriatric all-cause mortality [4]. According to Chung et al. study, severe coma was a stronger predictor than thrombocytopenia and leukocytosis in GFS [4].
However, recognition of altered cognitive status is difficult, as it must be compared with the baseline mental status of each patient. In our study, according to Chung et al. study, severe coma, defined as GCS ≤ 8) was used instead of altered cognitive status. We believe that this parameter is accurate and more practicable in clinical practice.
In a large-scale prospective analysis, Duan et al. explored the association of cognitive impairment and increased risk of all-cause mortality. This analysis was based on two Chinese cohorts with a 6-year follow-up period [13]. According to the study of Fogg et al., the highest in-hospital mortality (12.6%) was in patients with cognitive impairment [14]. The population in our study was similar to this study; about 13.3% of febrile geriatric patients with severe coma died.
In another study, Yao et al. showed impaired cognition had a higher risk of non-elective hospital readmission or death in geriatric patients (Hazard Ratio: 2.50, 95% CI: 1.27–4.91, P = 0.008) [15]. Morandi et al., in a study on a large cohort of medical and surgical older inpatients from 205 acute hospital wards in Italy, found that delirium and delirium superimposed on dementia had significant associations with increased risk of in-hospital death [16].
Leukocytosis was the second strongest predictor of mortality in GFS. Chung et al. found (59.1%) of all patients with leukocytosis had 30-day mortality. In our study, 45% of patients who died within 30 days had leukocytosis. Fernandez-Garrido et al. found WBC counts as a predictor of hospitalization and death [17]. The study of Asadollahi et al. showed that leukocytosis (WBC > 10 × 109/L) was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR 2.0, p < 0.001) [18].
While many studies have explored the relationship between leukocytosis and all-cause mortality, some studies have pertained to different definitions of leukocytosis. Marco et al. studied geriatric patients with fever who presented to the ED and found that leukocytosis (defined as a WBC count of 11,000 cells/mm3 or more) is a predictor of serious illness. Wasserman et al. found increasing specificity but decreasing sensitivity with increasing the cut-off for leukocyte counts from 11,000 to 14,000 or 16,000/mm3 [19].
Thrombocytopenia, defined as platelets < 150,000 /mm3, was also a predictor of mortality in our study. We think that a threshold of < 150,000 /mm3 is easier to remember than platelets < 100,000 /mm3, which is used in the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2012. Çakir et al. evaluated the relationship between mortality and erythrocyte and platelet indices in geriatric patients with sepsis. They found that low platelet count was a significant indicator of mortality. The average platelet count of non-survived patients in this study was 176.0 ± 83.7 [20]. The study of Misirlioğlu et al. showed that although 30-day mortality was more frequent in patients with thrombocytopenia at presentation, there was not a statistically significant difference. This is likely due to the low number of thrombocytopenic patients [21].
Limitations
Our study had several limitations. First, we employed a convenience rather than a consecutive sampling method. However, random shifts of researchers would compensate for this shortcoming to some extent. Second, our study was conducted in a single tertiary care referral hospital. The findings from our study might not be generalizable to other populations. Third, the calculation of GCS was performed by one person, and not rechecked by another physician. Moreover, GCS may not be reliable in patients with non-traumatic cognitive impairments. Determination of the effective sample size is crucial and our sample size is close to what was calculated as the required sample size, according to our statistical analysis. However, another study in the much larger data set can be helpful.
Conclusion
Our study showed that elderly patients who present to ED with fever and have a score of 2 or higher on GFS are at higher risk of mortality within 30 days.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Data availability
Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information files.
References
Kłosiewicz T, Rozmarynowska M, Konieczka P, Mazur M. Impact of Geriatric Admissions on Workload in the Emergency Department. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(4):593.
Latham LP, Ackroyd-Stolarz S. Emergency department utilization by older adults: a descriptive study. Can Geriatr J. 2014;17(4):118-25.
van den Broek S, Heiwegen N, Verhofstad M, Akkermans R, van Westerop L, et al. Preventable emergency admissions of older adults: an observational mixed-method study of rates, associative factors and underlying causes in two Dutch hospitals. BMJ Open. 2020Nov 20;10(11): e040431.
Chung M, Huang C, Vong S, Yang T, Chen K. Geriatric Fever Score: A New Decision Rule for Geriatric Care. PLoS ONE. 2014Oct 23;9(10): e110927.
De Buyser SL, Petrovic M, Taes Y, Vetrano DL, Onder G. A multicomponent approach to identify predictors of hospital outcomes in older in-patients: a multicentre, observational study. PLoS ONE. 2014Dec 26;9(12): e115413.
DeWitt S, Chavez SA, Perkins J, Long B, Koyfman A. Evaluation of fever in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med. 2017Nov;35(11):1755–8.
Roig-Marín N, Roig-Rico P. Elderly Hospitalized for COVID-19 and Fever: A Retrospective Cohort Study: COVID-19 and fever in the elderly. Exp Aging Res. 2021Sep;48(4):328–35.
Roig-Marín N, Roig-Rico P. Ground-glass opacity on emergency department chest X-ray: a risk factor for in-hospital mortality and organ failure in elderly admitted for COVID-19. Postgrad Med. 2022Jan;135(3):265–72.
Roig-Marín N, Roig-Rico P. The deadliest lung lobe in COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study of elderly patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Postgrad Med. 2022;134(5):533–9.
Lambden S, Laterre SM, Levy M, Francois B. The SOFA score—development, utility and challenges of accurate assessment in clinical trials. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):374.
Norman DC. Fever in the Elderly. Clin Infect Dis. 2000July;31:148–51.
Velma H, Amith SH, Marek N, Mandira CH, Anthony M, Eslick. Accuracy of Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score to Predict Sepsis Mortality in 121 Studies Including 1,716,017 Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Crit Care Expl. 2019;1:e0043.
Duan J, Yue-Bin Lv, Gao X, Zhou J, Kraus V, et al. Association of cognitive impairment and elderly mortality: differences between two cohorts ascertained 6-years apart in China. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20:29.
Fogg C, Griffiths G, Meredith P, Bridges J. Hospital outcomes of older people with cognitive impairment: An integrative review. Int J Geriatric Psychiatry. 2018Sep;33(9):1177–97.
Yao S, Zheng P, Liang Y, Wan Y, Sun N, et al. Predicting non-elective hospital readmission or death using a composite assessment of cognitive and physical frailty in elderly inpatients with cardiovascular disease. BMC Geriatric. 2020Jun 22;20(1):218.
Morandi A, Di Santo SG, Zambon A, Mazzone A, Cherubini A, et al. Italian Study Group on Delirium (ISGoD). Delirium, Dementia, and In-Hospital Mortality: The Results From the Italian Delirium Day 2016, A National Multicenter Study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2019;16;74(6):910–6.
Fernandez-Garrido J, Ruiz-Ros V, Navarro-Martínez R, Buigues C, Mary Martínez-Martínez et al. Frailty and leucocyte count are predictors of all-cause mortality and hospitalization length in non-demented institutionalized older women. Exp Gerontol. 2018;103:80-86.
Asadollahi K, Beeching NJ, Gill GV. Leukocytosis as a predictor for non-infective mortality and morbidity. QJM. 2010;103(5):285–92.
Marco C, Schoenfeld C, Hansen K, Hexter D, Stearns D, et al. Fever in geriatric emergency patients: clinical features associated with serious illness. Ann Emerg Med. 1995Jul;26(1):18–24.
Çakir E, Işıl E, Özkoçak T. Predictive effects of first erythrocyte and thrombocyte volume indices on mortality of geriatric patients with sepsis hospitalized in intensive care units. Turk J Geriatr. 2021;24(2):134–42.
Sinem R, Misirlioğlu M, Aksay E, Şanci E, Tertemiz K. Can thrombocytosis or thrombocytopenia predict complicated clinical course and 30-days mortality in patients with pneumonia? Turk J Med Sci. 2021;51(6):2903–7.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
H.A. and A.A. wrote the manuscript. A.S. and H.M. statistical analysis and methodologist. M.J. consultant. H.A. had the idea and supervised the study. H.G. collected data.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the Tehran University of Medical Science Ethical Committee (IR.TUMS.IKHC.REC.1399.122). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Further information and documentation to support this is available to the Editor on request.
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
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, 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 you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. 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-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Akbari, H., Mirfazaelian, H., Safaei, A. et al. Predicting mortality in geriatric patients with fever in the emergency departments: a prospective validation study. BMC Geriatr 24, 758 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-05346-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-05346-x