Geriatric PatientsEGERSNCT04680299
European Geriatric Emergency Departments Registry Study
An observational study of Geriatric Patients and Emergencies, run by Gazi University at 7 sites in 6 countries.
Trial summary
Geriatric presentations to emergency services comprise a significant percentage of all emergency service presentations in Europe and it has been reported that 3-23% of all emergency service presentations from various regions of the countries. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 to 110 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Geriatric Patients, Emergencies, Length of Stay
- How many people
- 3,000 participants
- Where
- 7 sitesin 6 countries
- Study dates
- 15 Oct 2020to 1 Oct 2021
- How long will I take part?
- 30 Days
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 65 to 110 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Study population: Patients ≥ 65 years of age those presented to Emergency Departments with any symptom during the recruitment period of the study
Who may be able to join
- Consecutive geriatric patient presenting to the ED with any symptom
- 65 years or older
Who cannot join
- No acceptance to participated to the study
- End of life patients
Trial locations and contacts
7 sites in 6 countries.
7 sites in 6 countries
Turkey (Türkiye)2 sites, 2 recruiting
- Recruiting
Gazi University
Ankara, 06580
Mehmet A. Karamercan, MD., +905053487548, makaramercan@gazi.edu.tr
- Recruiting
Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Medical Faculty
Konya, 42080
Zerrin D. Dundar, MD, +905324682555, zerdef@hotmail.com
Croatia1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Clinical Hospital Sveti Duh
Zagreb, 10 000
Višnja Nesek, MD., visnja.nesek@hotmail.com
France1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
CHU Tours
Tours, 37170
Said Laribi, MD, +33247478109, s.laribi@chu-tours.fr
Germany1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Charité Universitätsmedizin
Berlin, Duitsland, 10117
Anna Slagman, MD, anna.slagman@charite.de
Greece1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
University General Hospital ATTIKONi
Chaïdári, Griekenland, 12462
Effie Polyzogopoulou, MD., effiep@live.com
Ireland1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
St Michael's Hospital
Dublin, A96D628
Kelly Janssens, MD., janssenk@tcd.ie
About this study
Geriatric presentations to emergency services comprise a significant percentage of all emergency service presentations in Europe and it has been reported that 3-23% of all emergency service presentations from various regions of the countries. There are specific management practices for patients who are 65 years and older at emergency services. On the other hand several risk-scoring systems have been developed to define the severity class of the patient during their initial evaluation at emergency services.Only a few studies in the literature have evaluated risk-scoring systems for the geriatric patient group.Several studies have reported that risk-scoring systems, such as Identification of Seniors at Risk and Triage Risk Screening Tool, which are specifically developed for geriatric patients over 65 years who present to emergency services, are not sufficiently effective for evaluating patients in more severe conditions. Previously the TEDGeS (Turkish Emergency Departments Geriatric Scoring Study) pilot study was carried out and published by some of the investigators of this project.This pilot study enrolled all geriatric patients (age ≥ 65 years) and carried out in 13 centers from different cities of Turkey. This pilot study showed that geriatric patients not only constitute significant proportion of emergency department presentations but also these patients need more hospitalization. The predictive powers of the Modified Early Warning Score, Rapid Emergency Medicine Score and The Vital PAC Early Warning Score for hospitalization and mortality in geriatric patients those presented to emergency department are significantly high and might be concerned in the emergency department triage of these patients. Within the light of these pilot study results, the investigators have decided to execute this prospective, multinational, multicentric study with the main objective to determine the epidemiological and age related characteristics of geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department across Europe and evaluate early warning scoring systems systems regarding hospitalization, ICU admission and in-hospital mortality for geriatric patients.
Read the detailed description
Due to improved prevention, diagnosis and treatment modalities, life expectancy worldwide has risen. The number of adults over 65 years of age who are presenting to emergency services is increasing in parallel with the prolongation of the average life expectancy. While geriatric presentations to emergency services comprise 40-50% of all emergency service presentations in the U.S., it has been reported that 3-23% of all emergency service presentations from various regions of the country comprise patients of 65 years of age and older. There are specific management practices for patients who are 65 years and older at emergency services due to the presence of co-morbidities and the change of physiological responses to acute diseases in advanced age.
Several risk-scoring systems have been developed to define the severity class of the patient during their initial evaluation at emergency services and generally named as Early Warning Scores. Early Warning Scores (EWS) incorporate physiological measurements, which do predict outcome although the addition of other simple clinical parameters might further improve the sensitivity and specificity of these scores. On the other hand all these EWS are simple and easy to calculate, making their use appropriate in an emergency setting. Of these EWS, the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) have been widely used for many years (8) and The Vital PAC Early Warning Score (VIEWS) score was recently developed for the same purpose.
Only a few studies in the literature have evaluated risk-scoring systems for the geriatric patient group. Several studies have reported that risk-scoring systems, such as Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) and Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST), which are specifically developed for geriatric patients over 65 years who present to emergency services, are not sufficiently effective for evaluating patients in more severe conditions. Other studies have reported that the ESI triage classification predicts the prognosis correctly in only half of the patients over 65 years of age. In another study that evaluated the MEWS for the geriatric patient group, which was calculated during the presentation in emergency services, has been stated to have a prognostic value in terms of a poor result.
Previously the TEDGeS (Turkish Emergency Departments Geriatric Scoring Study) pilot study was carried out and published. This study enrolled all geriatric patients (age ≥ 65 years) and carried out in 13 centers (University Hospitals, Government Education and Research Hospitals and Military Hospital Emergency Departments) from different cities of Turkey.
Key findings were:
- Overall 30 % of hospitalized patients from Emergency Department (ED) are elderly patients and 30 % of these hospitalized patients were ICU hospitalizations
- In hospital mortality rate is about 6 % which is very high for general hospitalized patients
- The most common presenting symptoms are related to gastrointestinal systems and about 80 % of the cases using at least one chronic medication (22.2 % of the cases using more than 4 chronic medications
- About 45 % of the cases final diagnosis are related to cardiovascular system and gastrointestinal system and nearly 85 % of the hospitalized cases are treated in non-surgical clinics (cardiology-pulmonology-internal medicine 65 %)
- MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores are significantly high in hospitalized patients compared to discharged from ED and also these three scores are high in ICU hospitalized patients compared to both ward hospitalized and discharged patients.
- MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores are significantly high in non-survivors compared to survivors.
- MEWS, VIEWS scores has higher sensitivity and specificity in terms of in-hospital mortality
These results suggest that geriatric patients not only constitute significant proportion of ED presentations but also they need more hospitalization. The predictive powers of the MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores for hospitalization and mortality in geriatric patients those presented to ED are significantly high and might be concerned in the ED triage of these patients.
Within the light of these results this multinational, multicentric, prospective, non interventional, observational study on geriatric patients presented to ED. The main objective is 'To determine Epidemiologic and Age Related Characteristics of Geriatric Patients presenting to the ED across Europe' and secondary objectives are 'To evaluate Early Warning Scoring systems (REMS, MEWS and VIEWS Scores) and determine most suitable Geriatric Emergency Medicine Risk Score regarding hospitalization, ICU admission and in-hospital mortality for patients; To determine the most effective triage elements that can be used to predict hospitalization of geriatric patients presented to ED; To determine the in hospital mortality and short term mortality rates of the patients above 65 years of age presenting to the ED across Europe; Sub analysis of ED discharged patients versus admitted patients for characteristics, comparison to recommended care and re-ED visit; Comparison of European data characteristics, investigation, treatment and outcome to similar data in other part of the world.
- Keywords
- Older Patients, Emergency Department, Early Warning Score
- Medical subject headings
- Emergencies
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Medical history and co-morbidities
Listing of medical history and co-morbidities data provided by triage nurse, physician and the family during emergency department admission
Measured: Baseline
Secondary outcomes (3)
Length of Emergency Department stay
Continuous outcome measured via the Patient Electronic Medical records defined in hours, measured from patient ED triage registration till discharged or hospitalized from ED.
Measured: Up to 96 hours after registration to the ED
Length of Hospital stay
Continuous outcome measured via the Patient Electronic Medical records defined in Days, measured from admission to hospital wards or ICU date till discharge or death.
Measured: 30 days after recruitment
In Hospital Mortality
Hospital mortality of geriatric patients admitted to hospital wards or ICU from emergency department
Measured: 30 days after recruitment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Dec 2020
- Study start15 Oct 2020
- Primary completion21 Feb 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Oct 2021 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Geriatric PatientsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Gazi UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 3,000 participants (estimated)
- Target duration
- 30 Days
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Gazi University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) Research Network
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Mehmet Akif Karamercan, Gazi University
- Investigators
- Said Laribi, MD., Principal investigator, CHU ToursEffie Polyzogopoulou, MD., Principal investigator, University General Hospital ATTIKONKelly Janssens, MD., Principal investigator, Unity Health TorontoAnna Slagman, MD., Principal investigator, UKSH Campus KielMehmet A. Karamercan, MD., Study chair, Gazi University Faculty of MedicineZerrin D. Dundar, MD, Study chair, Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Medicine Faculty
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04680299
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EUSEM-1
- Acronym
- EGERS
- Status last verified
- Dec 2020
- First submitted
- 7 Dec 2020
- Last updated
- 22 Dec 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Dundar ZD, Ergin M, Karamercan MA, Ayranci K, Colak T, Tuncar A, Cander B, Gul M. Modified Early Warning Score and VitalPac Early Warning Score in geriatric patients admitted to emergency department. Eur J Emerg Med. 2016 Dec;23(6):406-412. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000274.
PubMed 25919485Cei M, Bartolomei C, Mumoli N. In-hospital mortality and morbidity of elderly medical patients can be predicted at admission by the Modified Early Warning Score: a prospective study. Int J Clin Pract. 2009 Apr;63(4):591-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01986.x. Epub 2009 Feb 11.
PubMed 19220521Dundar ZD, Ayranci MK. Presenting symptoms of older emergency department patients: a single-center experience of 10,692 patients in Turkey. Acta Clin Belg. 2020 Dec;75(6):405-410. doi: 10.1080/17843286.2019.1655215. Epub 2019 Aug 12.
PubMed 31402765Lamantia MA, Stewart PW, Platts-Mills TF, Biese KJ, Forbach C, Zamora E, McCall BK, Shofer FS, Cairns CB, Busby-Whitehead J, Kizer JS. Predictive value of initial triage vital signs for critically ill older adults. West J Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;14(5):453-60. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.5.13411.
PubMed 24106542Buurman BM, van den Berg W, Korevaar JC, Milisen K, de Haan RJ, de Rooij SE. Risk for poor outcomes in older patients discharged from an emergency department: feasibility of four screening instruments. Eur J Emerg Med. 2011 Aug;18(4):215-20. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328344597e.
PubMed 21317787Pines JM, Mullins PM, Cooper JK, Feng LB, Roth KE. National trends in emergency department use, care patterns, and quality of care of older adults in the United States. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013 Jan;61(1):12-7. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12072.
PubMed 23311549Platts-Mills TF, Travers D, Biese K, McCall B, Kizer S, LaMantia M, Busby-Whitehead J, Cairns CB. Accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index triage instrument for identifying elder emergency department patients receiving an immediate life-saving intervention. Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Mar;17(3):238-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00670.x.
PubMed 20370755Subbe CP, Kruger M, Rutherford P, Gemmel L. Validation of a modified Early Warning Score in medical admissions. QJM. 2001 Oct;94(10):521-6. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/94.10.521.
PubMed 11588210Wheeler I, Price C, Sitch A, Banda P, Kellett J, Nyirenda M, Rylance J. Early warning scores generated in developed healthcare settings are not sufficient at predicting early mortality in Blantyre, Malawi: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e59830. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059830. Epub 2013 Mar 29.
PubMed 23555796VaittinadaAyar P, Riedlinger D, Fakhiri S, Tassi MF, Karamercan MA, Dundar DZ, Ergin M, Fabbri A, Bjornsen LP, Somodi S, Adam VN, Polyzogopoulou E, Huseyin AD, Slagman A, Laribi S; EUSEM Research network study investigators. Risk stratification tool for older emergency department patients: the 6-items brief geriatric assessment. BMC Geriatr. 2026 Jun 16. doi: 10.1186/s12877-026-07825-9. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42304263
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Dec 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- European Geriatric Emergency Departments Registry Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04680299
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EGERS / EUSEM-1
- Keywords
- Older Patients, Emergency Department, Early Warning Score
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 3,000 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Gazi UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) Research Network
- Study start
- 15 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 21 Feb 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Oct 2021 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Geriatric presentations to emergency services comprise a significant percentage of all emergency service presentations in Europe and it has been reported that 3-23% of all emergency service presentations from various regions of the countries. There are specific management practices for patients who are 65 years and older at emergency services. On the other hand several risk-scoring systems have been developed to define the severity class of the patient during their initial evaluation at emergency services.Only a few studies in the literature have evaluated risk-scoring systems for the geriatric patient group.Several studies have reported that risk-scoring systems, such as Identification of Seniors at Risk and Triage Risk Screening Tool, which are specifically developed for geriatric patients over 65 years who present to emergency services, are not sufficiently effective for evaluating patients in more severe conditions. Previously the TEDGeS (Turkish Emergency Departments Geriatric Scoring Study) pilot study was carried out and published by some of the investigators of this project.This pilot study enrolled all geriatric patients (age ≥ 65 years) and carried out in 13 centers from different cities of Turkey. This pilot study showed that geriatric patients not only constitute significant proportion of emergency department presentations but also these patients need more hospitalization. The predictive powers of the Modified Early Warning Score, Rapid Emergency Medicine Score and The Vital PAC Early Warning Score for hospitalization and mortality in geriatric patients those presented to emergency department are significantly high and might be concerned in the emergency department triage of these patients. Within the light of these pilot study results, the investigators have decided to execute this prospective, multinational, multicentric study with the main objective to determine the epidemiological and age related characteristics of geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department across Europe and evaluate early warning scoring systems systems regarding hospitalization, ICU admission and in-hospital mortality for geriatric patients.
Detailed description
Due to improved prevention, diagnosis and treatment modalities, life expectancy worldwide has risen. The number of adults over 65 years of age who are presenting to emergency services is increasing in parallel with the prolongation of the average life expectancy. While geriatric presentations to emergency services comprise 40-50% of all emergency service presentations in the U.S., it has been reported that 3-23% of all emergency service presentations from various regions of the country comprise patients of 65 years of age and older. There are specific management practices for patients who are 65 years and older at emergency services due to the presence of co-morbidities and the change of physiological responses to acute diseases in advanced age.
Several risk-scoring systems have been developed to define the severity class of the patient during their initial evaluation at emergency services and generally named as Early Warning Scores. Early Warning Scores (EWS) incorporate physiological measurements, which do predict outcome although the addition of other simple clinical parameters might further improve the sensitivity and specificity of these scores. On the other hand all these EWS are simple and easy to calculate, making their use appropriate in an emergency setting. Of these EWS, the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the Rapid Emergency Medicine Score (REMS) have been widely used for many years (8) and The Vital PAC Early Warning Score (VIEWS) score was recently developed for the same purpose.
Only a few studies in the literature have evaluated risk-scoring systems for the geriatric patient group. Several studies have reported that risk-scoring systems, such as Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) and Triage Risk Screening Tool (TRST), which are specifically developed for geriatric patients over 65 years who present to emergency services, are not sufficiently effective for evaluating patients in more severe conditions. Other studies have reported that the ESI triage classification predicts the prognosis correctly in only half of the patients over 65 years of age. In another study that evaluated the MEWS for the geriatric patient group, which was calculated during the presentation in emergency services, has been stated to have a prognostic value in terms of a poor result.
Previously the TEDGeS (Turkish Emergency Departments Geriatric Scoring Study) pilot study was carried out and published. This study enrolled all geriatric patients (age ≥ 65 years) and carried out in 13 centers (University Hospitals, Government Education and Research Hospitals and Military Hospital Emergency Departments) from different cities of Turkey.
Key findings were:
- Overall 30 % of hospitalized patients from Emergency Department (ED) are elderly patients and 30 % of these hospitalized patients were ICU hospitalizations
- In hospital mortality rate is about 6 % which is very high for general hospitalized patients
- The most common presenting symptoms are related to gastrointestinal systems and about 80 % of the cases using at least one chronic medication (22.2 % of the cases using more than 4 chronic medications
- About 45 % of the cases final diagnosis are related to cardiovascular system and gastrointestinal system and nearly 85 % of the hospitalized cases are treated in non-surgical clinics (cardiology-pulmonology-internal medicine 65 %)
- MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores are significantly high in hospitalized patients compared to discharged from ED and also these three scores are high in ICU hospitalized patients compared to both ward hospitalized and discharged patients.
- MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores are significantly high in non-survivors compared to survivors.
- MEWS, VIEWS scores has higher sensitivity and specificity in terms of in-hospital mortality
These results suggest that geriatric patients not only constitute significant proportion of ED presentations but also they need more hospitalization. The predictive powers of the MEWS, VIEWS and REMS scores for hospitalization and mortality in geriatric patients those presented to ED are significantly high and might be concerned in the ED triage of these patients.
Within the light of these results this multinational, multicentric, prospective, non interventional, observational study on geriatric patients presented to ED. The main objective is 'To determine Epidemiologic and Age Related Characteristics of Geriatric Patients presenting to the ED across Europe' and secondary objectives are 'To evaluate Early Warning Scoring systems (REMS, MEWS and VIEWS Scores) and determine most suitable Geriatric Emergency Medicine Risk Score regarding hospitalization, ICU admission and in-hospital mortality for patients; To determine the most effective triage elements that can be used to predict hospitalization of geriatric patients presented to ED; To determine the in hospital mortality and short term mortality rates of the patients above 65 years of age presenting to the ED across Europe; Sub analysis of ED discharged patients versus admitted patients for characteristics, comparison to recommended care and re-ED visit; Comparison of European data characteristics, investigation, treatment and outcome to similar data in other part of the world.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 30 Days
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 to 110 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
- Study population
- Patients ≥ 65 years of age those presented to Emergency Departments with any symptom during the recruitment period of the study
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Consecutive geriatric patient presenting to the ED with any symptom
- 65 years or older
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- No acceptance to participated to the study
- End of life patients
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Medical history and co-morbidities
Time frame: Baseline
Listing of medical history and co-morbidities data provided by triage nurse, physician and the family during emergency department admission
3 secondary outcomes
Length of Emergency Department stay
Time frame: Up to 96 hours after registration to the ED
Length of Hospital stay
Time frame: 30 days after recruitment
In Hospital Mortality
Time frame: 30 days after recruitment
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Dec 2020.
- Background: PubMed 25919485Dundar ZD, Ergin M, Karamercan MA, Ayranci K, Colak T, Tuncar A, Cander B, Gul M. Modified Early Warning Score and VitalPac Early Warning Score in geriatric patients admitted to emergency department. Eur J Emerg Med. 2016 Dec;23(6):406-412. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000274.
- Background: PubMed 19220521Cei M, Bartolomei C, Mumoli N. In-hospital mortality and morbidity of elderly medical patients can be predicted at admission by the Modified Early Warning Score: a prospective study. Int J Clin Pract. 2009 Apr;63(4):591-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01986.x. Epub 2009 Feb 11.
- Background: PubMed 31402765Dundar ZD, Ayranci MK. Presenting symptoms of older emergency department patients: a single-center experience of 10,692 patients in Turkey. Acta Clin Belg. 2020 Dec;75(6):405-410. doi: 10.1080/17843286.2019.1655215. Epub 2019 Aug 12.
- Background: PubMed 24106542Lamantia MA, Stewart PW, Platts-Mills TF, Biese KJ, Forbach C, Zamora E, McCall BK, Shofer FS, Cairns CB, Busby-Whitehead J, Kizer JS. Predictive value of initial triage vital signs for critically ill older adults. West J Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;14(5):453-60. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.5.13411.
- Background: PubMed 21317787Buurman BM, van den Berg W, Korevaar JC, Milisen K, de Haan RJ, de Rooij SE. Risk for poor outcomes in older patients discharged from an emergency department: feasibility of four screening instruments. Eur J Emerg Med. 2011 Aug;18(4):215-20. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e328344597e.
- Background: PubMed 23311549Pines JM, Mullins PM, Cooper JK, Feng LB, Roth KE. National trends in emergency department use, care patterns, and quality of care of older adults in the United States. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013 Jan;61(1):12-7. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12072.
- Background: PubMed 20370755Platts-Mills TF, Travers D, Biese K, McCall B, Kizer S, LaMantia M, Busby-Whitehead J, Cairns CB. Accuracy of the Emergency Severity Index triage instrument for identifying elder emergency department patients receiving an immediate life-saving intervention. Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Mar;17(3):238-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00670.x.
- Background: PubMed 11588210Subbe CP, Kruger M, Rutherford P, Gemmel L. Validation of a modified Early Warning Score in medical admissions. QJM. 2001 Oct;94(10):521-6. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/94.10.521.
- Background: PubMed 23555796Wheeler I, Price C, Sitch A, Banda P, Kellett J, Nyirenda M, Rylance J. Early warning scores generated in developed healthcare settings are not sufficient at predicting early mortality in Blantyre, Malawi: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e59830. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059830. Epub 2013 Mar 29.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42304263VaittinadaAyar P, Riedlinger D, Fakhiri S, Tassi MF, Karamercan MA, Dundar DZ, Ergin M, Fabbri A, Bjornsen LP, Somodi S, Adam VN, Polyzogopoulou E, Huseyin AD, Slagman A, Laribi S; EUSEM Research network study investigators. Risk stratification tool for older emergency department patients: the 6-items brief geriatric assessment. BMC Geriatr. 2026 Jun 16. doi: 10.1186/s12877-026-07825-9. Online ahead of print.
Related trials for Geriatric Patients
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Not yet recruiting
Bispectral Index-Guided Propofol Sedation During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Deep Sedation, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Not yet recruiting
Expanded Diagnostic Strategy in Older Adults Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Acute Respiratory Infection
Acute Respiratory Infection
RecruitingPhase 2
Testing New Therapies for Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia Who Are Newly Diagnosed and Have Not Yet Started Treatment (A MyeloMATCH Treatment Trial)
Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Acute Myeloid Leukemia Arising From Previous Myelodysplastic/Myeloproliferative Neoplasm
RecruitingPhase 4
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
Comparison of Hemodynamics and Respiratory Function Between Ciprofol and Propofol in Elderly Patients Undergoing Non-intubated General Anesthesia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Said Laribi, MD. principal investigator
CHU Tours
Effie Polyzogopoulou, MD. principal investigator
University General Hospital ATTIKON
Kelly Janssens, MD. principal investigator
Unity Health Toronto
7 sites in 6 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Geriatric Patients and Emergencies, run by Gazi University at 7 sites in 6 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Dec 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 7 sites in Turkey (Türkiye), Croatia, France, Germany, Greece and 1 more country. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Mehmet A. Karamercan, MD (+905053487548, makaramercan@gazi.edu.tr), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Medical history and co-morbidities (time frame: Baseline). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04680299, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 Dec 2020.