-
- Annemieke E Boendermaker, Constant W Coolsma, Marloes Emous, and Ewoud Ter Avest.
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical Centre Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
- Emerg Med J. 2018 Aug 1; 35 (8): 499-506.
IntroductionMany patients presenting with abdominal pain to emergency departments (EDs) are discharged without a definitive diagnosis. For these patients, often designated as having non-specific abdominal pain, re-evaluation is often advocated. We aimed to investigate how often re-evaluation changes the diagnosis and clinical management and discern factors that could help identify patients likely to benefit from re-evaluation.MethodsThis was a retrospective study conducted in the Netherlands between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 of patients asked to return to the ED after an initial presentation with acute non-traumatic abdominal pain. The primary outcome was a clinically relevant change in treatment (surgery, endoscopy during admission and/or hospitalisation) and diagnosis at ED re-evaluation within 30 hours.ResultsDuring the 2-year study period, 358 ED patients with non-specific abdominal pain were scheduled for re-evaluation. Of these, 14% (11%-18%)) did not present for re-evaluation. Re-evaluation resulted in a clinically relevant change in diagnosis and treatment in, respectively, 21.3% (17%-29%)) and 22.3% (18%-27%)) of the subjects. Of the clinical, biochemical and radiological factors available at the index visit, C reactive protein (CRP) at the index visit predicted a change in treatment (CRP >27 mg/L likelihood ratio (LR)+ 1.69 (1.21-2.36)), while an increase in CRP of >25 mg/L between index and re-evaluation visit (LR+ 2.85 (1.88-4.32)) and the conduct of radiological studies at the re-evaluation visit were associated with changes in treatment (LR+ 3.05 (2.41-3.86)).ConclusionRe-evaluation within 30 hours for ED patients discharged with non-specific abdominal pain resulted in a clinically relevant change in diagnosis and therapy in almost one-quarter of patients. Elevated CRP at the index visit might assist in correctly identifying patients with a greater likelihood of needing treatment in follow-up, and a low threshold for radiological studies should be considered during re-evaluation.© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:

- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.