Febrile neutropenia (FN) is an oncologic emergency, and prolonged time to antibiotic administration (TTA) is associated with increased hospital length of stay (LOS) and worse outcomes. We hypothesized that a febrile neutropenia pathway (FNP) quality initiative project would reduce TTA delays for febrile patients with cancer presenting to the emergency department (ED).
This prospective study compared ED FNP patients (> 18 years old), between June 2012 and June 2013 with both historical and direct admissions (DA) cohorts at a multispecialty academic center. Interventions included providing patients with FN-Alert cards, standardizing the definition of FN and recognizing it as a distinct chief complaint, revising ED triage level for FN, creating electronic FN order sets, administering empiric antibiotics before neutrophil count result, and relocating FN antibiotics to the ED. The primary outcome was TTA, with a target goal of 90 minutes after ED presentation.
In total, 276 FN episodes in 223 FNP patients occurred over the 12-month study period and were compared with 107 episodes in 87 patients and 114 episodes in 101 patients in the historical and DA cohorts, respectively. Use of the FNP reduced TTA from 235 and 169 minutes in historical and DA cohorts, respectively, to 81 minutes, and from 96 to 68 minutes when the order set was not used versus used in the FNP group (P < .001 for all comparisons). Decrease in hospital LOS was not statistically significant.
The ED FNP is a significant quality initiative with sustainable interventions, and was able to demonstrate value by decreasing TTA compared to both historical and DA controls in cancer patients presenting to the ED.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#8,171,620
of 28,115,974 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Oncology Practice
#949
of 1,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,792
of 277,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Oncology Practice
#19
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,115,974 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,655 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
