Elderly (People Aged 65 or More)EDEN-RICAPPSNCT07194122
Poor Outcomes Among Patients Aged 65 and Older Presenting to the Emergency Department(EDEN-RICAPPS Study)
An observational study of Elderly (People Aged 65 or More) and Vital Signs, run by Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Our objective is to create and validate predictive models of poor outcome in people over 65 years of age seen in emergency departments. To this end, models will be developed and validated internally, adapting the reference values of vital signs to this population segment and also taking into account their most… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 to 120 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Elderly (People Aged 65 or More), Vital Signs
- How many people
- 141,929 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2019to 31 Dec 2024
- 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 120 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Study population: patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period
Who may be able to join
- patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period
Who cannot join
- arrival at the emergency department in critical condition in pre-mortem situations,
- absence of a carer in situations of severe dependency
- presence of mental illness, and refusal to participate in the study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Poor Outcomes Among Patients Aged 65 and Older Presenting to the Emergency Department
Our objective is to create and validate predictive models of poor outcome in people over 65 years of age seen in emergency departments. To this end, models will be developed and validated internally, adapting the reference values of vital signs to this population segment and also taking into account their most frequent reasons for consultation. We will use the EDEN cohort of 18374 patients recruited in one week in 2019 in 40 Spanish hospitals. Subsequently, they will be externally validated in a cohort of 18000 patients prospectively recruited in 7 hospitals in 2024. In addition, the predictive capacity of the FIM frailty scale will be measured. lnformation will be collected from electronic medical records regarding socio-demographic data, functional status, reasons for consultation, clinical and ED history including comorbidities, previous and prescribed ED treatments and vital signs. The main dependent variable is poor outcome defined as ED exitus, admission to ICU/ICU or conventional admission, as well as mortality, revisits and readmissions 30 days after hospital discharge. Updated poor outcome models will be provided that can serve as a basis for creating triage models adapted to the over-65s in the future.
Read the detailed description
HYPOTHESIS
Current emergency triage systems (MAT, SET, others), as well as early warning systems (NEWS-2), are unable to detect all geriatric patients at risk of poor outcomes, partly due to:
- the reference values for vital signs are not the same as in the population under 65 years of age
- atypical presentations of diseases occur more frequently than in the population under 65 years of age.
3.- It is possible to develop and validate predictive models of poor outcomes in the emergency department (death in the emergency department, admission to the ICU or conventional admission, as well as mortality, revisits and readmissions within 30 days of hospital discharge) that incorporate adapted vital signs and symptoms that are more frequent in this population.
4.- Frailty is related to poor outcomes in the emergency department and will add predictive power to the above models.
Objectives:
- Establish reference values for vital signs in people over 65 years of age.
- Identify the most common presentations in emergency departments among this age group.
- Develop and validate predictive models of poor outcomes (e.g. death in the emergency department, admission to the ICU/UCRI, conventional admission, mortality, revisits, and readmissions within 30 days of hospital discharge) in the emergency department. Incorporate the ranges of adapted vital signs and the most frequent symptoms in this population into these models.
- Evaluate the predictive capacity of the FIM frailty scale to detect poor outcomes, comparing a model incorporating this scale with those created in Objective 3.
DESIGN: Ambispective cohort study, to be developed in two phases: 1. Retrospective cohort study based on data from the 2019 EDEN study for objectives 1, 2, and 3. 2. Prospective cohort study of patients over 65 years of age treated in the emergency departments of participating hospitals in 2024 for objectives 3 and 4.
SCOPE t.-EDEN (Emergency Department and Elders in Need) cohort study conducted on patients aged 65 years or older who attended Spanish hospital emergency departments belonging to the SIESTA network for care for any condition in 2019. Objectives 1, 2 and the development and internal validation of models of poor outcomes in emergency departments.
2.-External validation cohort: to be created, based on the EHRs of the Galdakao-Usansolo, Basurto, and Araba university hospitals (Basque Country) San Carlos Hospital (Madrid), Hospital del Mar (Catalonia), University Hospital of the Canary Islands (Canary Islands), Miguel Servet Hospital (Aragon), in which patients aged 65 or over who are treated in 2024 will be recruited. Objective 3, external validation, and 4, compare predictive capacity when the frailty scale is added.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:
1.-Inclusion criteria: patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period. 2.-Exclusion criteria: arrival at the emergency department in critical condition, pre-mortem situations, absence of a carer in situations of severe dependency, or Severe mental illness or the presence of mental pathology and refusal to participate in the study.
3.-Losses: Changes of address that make the patient untraceable; in the prospective cohort: language difficulties, voluntary withdrawal from the study during the one-month follow-up period.
SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION: Predictive model development studies establish that it is necessary to have at least 10 events of the dependent variable of primary interest (in our case, we calculated this for in-hospital mortality, which is the least frequent event of all those that make up the primary outcome variable) for each independent variable included in the multivariate logistic regression model. (Steyerberg, 2009) Given that our intention is to include a limited but comprehensive number of variables in the multivariate model (predictably, no fewer than 10), we estimate that at least 100 events of the dependent variable will be necessary in the derivation sample to ensure that the regression model converges adequately. In the EDEN cohort, in the period 2019, 0.55% died in the emergency department. This means that in 18,181 patients, it is estimated that there will be 100 events of the dependent variable death. At least 100 events are needed to perform external validation (Collins GS, 2016). That is why we would need another 18,181 patients to be divided among the participating centres, 8 per day, 13,102/2023, 2020 per centre.
SAMPLING: Consecutive convenience sampling, during one week per season of the year.
EXPOSURE VARIABLES:
- Sociodemographic characteristics: age, sex, manner of arrival at the emergency department, previous medical consultation and with whom, situation of accompaniment at home, and whether social assistance is available.
- Related to the patient's baseline functional status: dependence according to the Barthel Index -18 -, comorbidity according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index -CCI -, whether they have had falls in the previous 6 months and whether there are previous diagnoses of dementia and depression).
Chronic treatments. e) Emergency episode: reason for consultation, vital signs, MAT/SET triage level, additional tests requested, laboratory test results, length of stay in the emergency department (time of discharge-time of arrival) e) Resource consumption: 6 relating to diagnostic tests, 13 relating to therapeutic actions and 5 relating to the use of structural resources: need for observation in the emergency department, hospitalisation, intensive care during hospitalisation and total length of stay in the emergency department (for the entire cohort) and in hospital (only for hospitalised patients).
- Destination upon discharge e) FIM scale that allows the subject to be classified into four categories after viewing 4 vignettes.
OUTCOME VARIABLES:
Primary: Composite variable: emergency department deaths, transfer to critical care unit from emergency department (ICU/UCRI), hospital admission, in-hospital mortality.
Secondary: Follow-up: return visits/readmission/death up to one month after discharge, functional deterioration at one month (by telephone) in survivors discharged.
DATA COLLECTION METHODS. 1.-EDEN cohort: A multipurpose registry was created that included all patients who visited the emergency department, regardless of the reason for their visit, in 2019 and 2020. Two different periods were established, each comprising a full week. Information was extracted from 228 primary variables corresponding to sociodemographic data, comorbidity, functional status and baseline treatments, clinical aspects, consumption of diagnostic and therapeutic resources, and final diagnosis in the emergency department, patient disposition after emergency care, hospitalisation (if any) and follow-up after discharge from the process (whether directly from the emergency department or after hospitalisation). Follow-up was carried out electronically by consulting the patient's medical records. b) Prospective cohort of patients from the nine participating centres aged over 65 who attend the emergency services in 2024, from which the same information will be extracted as in the retrospective study. In addition, the FIM frailty scale will be administered.LIMITATIONS: We are not taking into account situations of deterioration that do not reach CPR, as we do not have clearly identifiable variables in the large databases to record them. Situations with a poor prognosis in which the patient will not benefit from a stay in the ICU, as well as expected CRPs and deaths, are not recorded in the databases. This represents a non-differential selection bias, as there is no way to differentiate them in the sampling through the electronic medical record, which will underestimate the effect of the intervention.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The EDEN project was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital Clínico San Carlos in Madrid (protocol HCSC/22/005-E). Due to the characteristics of the study and the time periods for which data collection was planned, exemption from written informed consent by patients was accepted. The database was used with coded patients to preserve anonymity. The creation of the EDEN and EDEN-Covid cohorts and the work arising from them have at all times followed the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The IPs of the EDEN project will submit an addendum to this committee. This project will be approved by the CEIM -Euskadi.
- Conditions
- Elderly (People Aged 65 or More), Vital Signs
- Keywords
- EDEN cohort, vital signs, elderly patients, cut-off points, adverse outcomes
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
UCI and or death
Intra-emergency room
Measured: up to 72 hours
Secondary outcomes (2)
readmission or ICU admission or death
medium-term outcomes
Measured: up to one month after discharge
UCI admission OR mortality
admission or discharge
Measured: in-hospital mortality or up to 7 days in discharged patients
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Sep 2025
- Study start1 Jan 2019
- Primary completion31 Dec 2024
- Study completion31 Dec 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Elderly (People Aged 65 or More)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Other
- Enrolment
- 141,929 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Collaborators
- Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Hospital San Carlos, Madrid
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Susana García Gutiérrez, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo
- Investigators
- Susana García Gutiérrez, Principal investigator, Osakidetza, Hospital Galdakao-UsansoloJuan Gonzalez del Castillo, PhD, Study director, Hospital San Carlos, MadridOscar Miró, PhD, Study chair, Hospital Clinic
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07194122
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HGaldakaoUsansolo
- Acronym
- EDEN-RICAPPS
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 10 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 26 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: We will share the information in zenodo
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Poor Outcomes Among Patients Aged 65 and Older Presenting to the Emergency Department
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07194122
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EDEN-RICAPPS / HGaldakaoUsansolo
- Conditions
- Elderly (People Aged 65 or More), Vital Signs
- Keywords
- EDEN cohort, vital signs, elderly patients, cut-off points, adverse outcomes
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 141,929 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Galdakao-UsansoloOther government
- Collaborators
- Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Hospital San Carlos, Madrid
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Sep 2025 (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.
Our objective is to create and validate predictive models of poor outcome in people over 65 years of age seen in emergency departments. To this end, models will be developed and validated internally, adapting the reference values of vital signs to this population segment and also taking into account their most frequent reasons for consultation. We will use the EDEN cohort of 18374 patients recruited in one week in 2019 in 40 Spanish hospitals. Subsequently, they will be externally validated in a cohort of 18000 patients prospectively recruited in 7 hospitals in 2024. In addition, the predictive capacity of the FIM frailty scale will be measured. lnformation will be collected from electronic medical records regarding socio-demographic data, functional status, reasons for consultation, clinical and ED history including comorbidities, previous and prescribed ED treatments and vital signs. The main dependent variable is poor outcome defined as ED exitus, admission to ICU/ICU or conventional admission, as well as mortality, revisits and readmissions 30 days after hospital discharge. Updated poor outcome models will be provided that can serve as a basis for creating triage models adapted to the over-65s in the future.
Detailed description
HYPOTHESIS
Current emergency triage systems (MAT, SET, others), as well as early warning systems (NEWS-2), are unable to detect all geriatric patients at risk of poor outcomes, partly due to:
- the reference values for vital signs are not the same as in the population under 65 years of age
- atypical presentations of diseases occur more frequently than in the population under 65 years of age.
3.- It is possible to develop and validate predictive models of poor outcomes in the emergency department (death in the emergency department, admission to the ICU or conventional admission, as well as mortality, revisits and readmissions within 30 days of hospital discharge) that incorporate adapted vital signs and symptoms that are more frequent in this population.
4.- Frailty is related to poor outcomes in the emergency department and will add predictive power to the above models.
Objectives:
- Establish reference values for vital signs in people over 65 years of age.
- Identify the most common presentations in emergency departments among this age group.
- Develop and validate predictive models of poor outcomes (e.g. death in the emergency department, admission to the ICU/UCRI, conventional admission, mortality, revisits, and readmissions within 30 days of hospital discharge) in the emergency department. Incorporate the ranges of adapted vital signs and the most frequent symptoms in this population into these models.
- Evaluate the predictive capacity of the FIM frailty scale to detect poor outcomes, comparing a model incorporating this scale with those created in Objective 3.
DESIGN: Ambispective cohort study, to be developed in two phases: 1. Retrospective cohort study based on data from the 2019 EDEN study for objectives 1, 2, and 3. 2. Prospective cohort study of patients over 65 years of age treated in the emergency departments of participating hospitals in 2024 for objectives 3 and 4.
SCOPE t.-EDEN (Emergency Department and Elders in Need) cohort study conducted on patients aged 65 years or older who attended Spanish hospital emergency departments belonging to the SIESTA network for care for any condition in 2019. Objectives 1, 2 and the development and internal validation of models of poor outcomes in emergency departments.
2.-External validation cohort: to be created, based on the EHRs of the Galdakao-Usansolo, Basurto, and Araba university hospitals (Basque Country) San Carlos Hospital (Madrid), Hospital del Mar (Catalonia), University Hospital of the Canary Islands (Canary Islands), Miguel Servet Hospital (Aragon), in which patients aged 65 or over who are treated in 2024 will be recruited. Objective 3, external validation, and 4, compare predictive capacity when the frailty scale is added.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:
1.-Inclusion criteria: patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period. 2.-Exclusion criteria: arrival at the emergency department in critical condition, pre-mortem situations, absence of a carer in situations of severe dependency, or Severe mental illness or the presence of mental pathology and refusal to participate in the study.
3.-Losses: Changes of address that make the patient untraceable; in the prospective cohort: language difficulties, voluntary withdrawal from the study during the one-month follow-up period.
SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION: Predictive model development studies establish that it is necessary to have at least 10 events of the dependent variable of primary interest (in our case, we calculated this for in-hospital mortality, which is the least frequent event of all those that make up the primary outcome variable) for each independent variable included in the multivariate logistic regression model. (Steyerberg, 2009) Given that our intention is to include a limited but comprehensive number of variables in the multivariate model (predictably, no fewer than 10), we estimate that at least 100 events of the dependent variable will be necessary in the derivation sample to ensure that the regression model converges adequately. In the EDEN cohort, in the period 2019, 0.55% died in the emergency department. This means that in 18,181 patients, it is estimated that there will be 100 events of the dependent variable death. At least 100 events are needed to perform external validation (Collins GS, 2016). That is why we would need another 18,181 patients to be divided among the participating centres, 8 per day, 13,102/2023, 2020 per centre.
SAMPLING: Consecutive convenience sampling, during one week per season of the year.
EXPOSURE VARIABLES:
- Sociodemographic characteristics: age, sex, manner of arrival at the emergency department, previous medical consultation and with whom, situation of accompaniment at home, and whether social assistance is available.
- Related to the patient's baseline functional status: dependence according to the Barthel Index -18 -, comorbidity according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index -CCI -, whether they have had falls in the previous 6 months and whether there are previous diagnoses of dementia and depression).
Chronic treatments. e) Emergency episode: reason for consultation, vital signs, MAT/SET triage level, additional tests requested, laboratory test results, length of stay in the emergency department (time of discharge-time of arrival) e) Resource consumption: 6 relating to diagnostic tests, 13 relating to therapeutic actions and 5 relating to the use of structural resources: need for observation in the emergency department, hospitalisation, intensive care during hospitalisation and total length of stay in the emergency department (for the entire cohort) and in hospital (only for hospitalised patients).
- Destination upon discharge e) FIM scale that allows the subject to be classified into four categories after viewing 4 vignettes.
OUTCOME VARIABLES:
Primary: Composite variable: emergency department deaths, transfer to critical care unit from emergency department (ICU/UCRI), hospital admission, in-hospital mortality.
Secondary: Follow-up: return visits/readmission/death up to one month after discharge, functional deterioration at one month (by telephone) in survivors discharged.
DATA COLLECTION METHODS. 1.-EDEN cohort: A multipurpose registry was created that included all patients who visited the emergency department, regardless of the reason for their visit, in 2019 and 2020. Two different periods were established, each comprising a full week. Information was extracted from 228 primary variables corresponding to sociodemographic data, comorbidity, functional status and baseline treatments, clinical aspects, consumption of diagnostic and therapeutic resources, and final diagnosis in the emergency department, patient disposition after emergency care, hospitalisation (if any) and follow-up after discharge from the process (whether directly from the emergency department or after hospitalisation). Follow-up was carried out electronically by consulting the patient's medical records. b) Prospective cohort of patients from the nine participating centres aged over 65 who attend the emergency services in 2024, from which the same information will be extracted as in the retrospective study. In addition, the FIM frailty scale will be administered.LIMITATIONS: We are not taking into account situations of deterioration that do not reach CPR, as we do not have clearly identifiable variables in the large databases to record them. Situations with a poor prognosis in which the patient will not benefit from a stay in the ICU, as well as expected CRPs and deaths, are not recorded in the databases. This represents a non-differential selection bias, as there is no way to differentiate them in the sampling through the electronic medical record, which will underestimate the effect of the intervention.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The EDEN project was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital Clínico San Carlos in Madrid (protocol HCSC/22/005-E). Due to the characteristics of the study and the time periods for which data collection was planned, exemption from written informed consent by patients was accepted. The database was used with coded patients to preserve anonymity. The creation of the EDEN and EDEN-Covid cohorts and the work arising from them have at all times followed the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The IPs of the EDEN project will submit an addendum to this committee. This project will be approved by the CEIM -Euskadi.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Other
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 to 120 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
- Study population
- patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- patients over 65 years of age who attend the emergency department for any reason during the study period
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- arrival at the emergency department in critical condition in pre-mortem situations,
- absence of a carer in situations of severe dependency
- presence of mental illness, and refusal to participate in the study.
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
UCI and or death
Time frame: up to 72 hours
Intra-emergency room
2 secondary outcomes
readmission or ICU admission or death
Time frame: up to one month after discharge
UCI admission OR mortality
Time frame: in-hospital mortality or up to 7 days in discharged patients
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Sep 2025.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. We will share the information in zenodo
Related trials for Elderly (People Aged 65 or More)
Not yet recruiting
Impact of Pharmacotherapy Optimization in Polymedicated Lebanese Older Adults in Primary Health Care Centers
Older Adults (65 Years and Older), Polypharmacy (People Under Treatment With 5 or More Drugs)
RecruitingPhase 3
Safety and Efficacy of Very Short DAPT in Older Patients Undergoing PCI
Coronary Artery Disease (CAD), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI)
Not yet recruiting
A Clinician-Patient Dual Behavior Change Framework to Leverage Informed Digital Nudges to Reduce Hospital Readmissions and Improve Patient Outcomes: A Trial for Scalable Strategy to Reduce Readmissions (PREVENT-R)
Readmission, Readmission Rates
RecruitingObservational study
Functional Decline and Quality of Life After Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery in Older Adults
Cancer Abdomen, Elderly (People Aged 65 or More)
Recruiting
Effect of Exergaming Program Versus Neuromuscular Exercise in Elderly People With Motor Cognitive Risk Syndrome
Motoric Cognitive Risk Syndrome, Elderly (People Aged 65 or More)
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.
Susana García Gutiérrez principal investigator
Osakidetza, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo
Juan Gonzalez del Castillo, PhD study director
Hospital San Carlos, Madrid
Oscar Miró, PhD study chair
Hospital Clinic
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Elderly (People Aged 65 or More) and Vital Signs, run by Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo at 1 site in Spain.
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 1 inclusion and 3 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
UCI and or death (time frame: up to 72 hours). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 26 Sep 2025.