Stepwise evaluation of unexplained syncope in a large ambulatory population.

BACKGROUND: Up to 60% of syncopal episodes remain unexplained. We report the results of a standardized, stepwise evaluation of patients referred to an ambulatory clinic for unexplained syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 939 consecutive patients referred for unexplained syncope, who underwent a standardized evaluation, including history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, head-up tilt testing (HUTT), carotid sinus massage (CSM) and hyperventilation testing (HYV). Echocardiogram and stress test were performed when underlying heart disease was initially suspected. Electrophysiological study (EPS) and implantable loop recorder (ILR) were used only in patients with underlying structural heart disease or major unexplained syncope. We identified a cause of syncope in 66% of patients, including 27% vasovagal, 14% psychogenic, 6% arrhythmias, and 6% hypotension. Noninvasive testing identified 92% and invasive testing an additional 8% of the causes. HUTT yielded 38%, CSM 28%, HYV 49%, EPS 22%, and ILR 56% of diagnoses. On average, patients with arrhythmic causes were older, had a lower functional capacity, longer P-wave duration, and presented with fewer prodromes than patients with vasovagal or psychogenic syncope. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized stepwise evaluation emphasizing noninvasive tests yielded 2/3 of causes in patients referred to an ambulatory clinic for unexplained syncope. Neurally mediated and psychogenic mechanisms were behind >50% of episodes, while cardiac arrhythmias were uncommon. Sudden syncope, particularly in older patients with functional limitations or a prolonged P-wave, suggests an arrhythmic cause.

Characterizing the vulnerability of frequent emergency department users by applying a conceptual framework: a controlled, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Frequent emergency department (ED) users meet several of the criteria of vulnerability, but this needs to be further examined taking into consideration all vulnerability's different dimensions. This study aimed to characterize frequent ED users and to define risk factors of frequent ED use within a universal health care coverage system, applying a conceptual framework of vulnerability. METHODS: A controlled, cross-sectional study comparing frequent ED users to a control group of non-frequent users was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Frequent users were defined as patients with five or more visits to the ED in the previous 12 months. The two groups were compared using validated scales for each one of the five dimensions of an innovative conceptual framework: socio-demographic characteristics; somatic, mental, and risk-behavior indicators; and use of health care services. Independent t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Pearson's Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were used for the comparison. To examine the -related to vulnerability- risk factors for being a frequent ED user, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: We compared 226 frequent users and 173 controls. Frequent users had more vulnerabilities in all five dimensions of the conceptual framework. They were younger, and more often immigrants from low/middle-income countries or unemployed, had more somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, were more often tobacco users, and had more primary care physician (PCP) visits. The most significant frequent ED use risk factors were a history of more than three hospital admissions in the previous 12 months (adj OR:23.2, 95%CI = 9.1-59.2), the absence of a PCP (adj OR:8.4, 95%CI = 2.1-32.7), living less than 5 km from an ED (adj OR:4.4, 95%CI = 2.1-9.0), and household income lower than USD 2,800/month (adj OR:4.3, 95%CI = 2.0-9.2). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent ED users within a universal health coverage system form a highly vulnerable population, when taking into account all five dimensions of a conceptual framework of vulnerability. The predictive factors identified could be useful in the early detection of future frequent users, in order to address their specific needs and decrease vulnerability, a key priority for health care policy makers. Application of the conceptual framework in future research is warranted.

Associations between perceived discrimination and health status among frequent Emergency Department users

Objective: Frequent Emergency Department (ED) users are vulnerable individuals and discrimination is usually associated with increased vulnerability. The aim of this study was to investigate frequent ED users' perceptions of discrimination and to test whether they were associated with increased vulnerability. Methods: In total, 250 adult frequent ED users were interviewed in Lausanne University Hospital. From a previously published questionnaire, we assessed 15 dichotomous sources of perceived discrimination. Vulnerability was assessed using health status: objective health status (evaluation by a healthcare practitioner including somatic, mental health, behavioral, and social issues - dichotomous variables) and subjective health status [self-evaluation including health-related quality of life (WHOQOL) and quality of life (EUROQOL) - mean-scores]. We computed the prevalence rates of perceived discrimination and tested associations between perceived discrimination and health status (Fischer's exact tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests)