• Diwura K Owolabi, Richard Rowland, Lauren King, Rick Miller, Gajanan G Hegde, Jennifer Shang, John Lister, and Arvind Venkat.
• Department of Pharmacy, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2015 Jul 1;33(7):966-9.

ObjectiveWe compared the quality of care in admitted febrile neutropenic cancer patients presenting through the emergency department (ED) vs those directly admitted (DA) from the clinic or infusion center. We hypothesized that the quality of care would be comparable between these 2 pathways.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of all adult cancer patients hospitalized with subjective or objective fever (≥100.4°F) and documented neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count ≤1000/mm(3)) from January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013, at 2 hospitals. Two investigators retrieved data including patient age, sex, race, tumor type, blood culture growth, temperature (actual or reported), pathway to admission (ED or DA), time to antibiotic administration, length of stay, and the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk score. The primary outcome measures were time to antibiotic administration, appropriateness of antibiotic(s) administered based on published guidelines, length of stay, and MASCC score-based risk assessment. We used the t test for the difference between 2 means with unequal population variances to compare these outcome measures between ED and DA patients.ResultsOne hundred twenty-seven visits met inclusion criteria (42 [33%] ED visits, 85 [67%] DA visits). Mean time to antibiotic administration, mean length of stay, appropriateness of antibiotics, and MASCC score-based risk assessment were comparable between ED and DA visits (P>.05 for all comparisons).ConclusionThe quality of care for febrile neutropenia in patients presenting through the ED was comparable to those directly admitted to the hospital in this 2-center study.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

40 keywords...

hide…