HomeCardiovascular Scores, Indexes, And Algorithms › EVEREST HF Prognostic Algorithm (EVEREST Score) Calculator

EVEREST HF Prognostic Algorithm (EVEREST Score) Calculator

  • Dyspnea
  • Orthopnea
  • Fatigue
  • Jugular venous distension (JVD) — choose the category corresponding to measured height (cm H2O)
  • Rales (lung crackles)
  • Pedal edema
  • EVEREST HF Prognostic Algorithm — explanation and context
    The EVEREST score is a 0–18 clinician-rated composite of six symptoms/signs of congestion: dyspnea, orthopnea, fatigue, jugular venous distension (JVD), rales, and pedal edema. Each item is graded 0–3 using the standardized EVEREST grading scale (0 = none; 1 = seldom or mild; 2 = moderate/frequent; 3 = continuous/marked or the numeric JVD/rales/edema thresholds defined in the original paper). The score was developed from the EVEREST trial dataset and has been used in post-hoc analyses to quantify residual clinical congestion at discharge. In published work a discharge EVEREST score < 2 has been proposed as a practical decongestion target; even small increases (for example ≥1) have been associated with higher subsequent risk of heart-failure events and rehospitalization, and higher scores (for example ≥3) with higher mortality risk over months. This tool reproduces the original EVEREST grading approach to provide a consistent, reproducible clinician-rated congestion score for bedside use.

    Reference:
    Andrew P. Ambrosy et al., “Clinical course and predictive value of congestion during hospitalization in patients admitted for worsening signs and symptoms of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: findings from the EVEREST trial.” Eur Heart J. 2013;34:835–843.
    Nadia Bouabdallaoui et al., “Assessing Splanchnic Compartment Using Portal Venous Doppler and Impact of Adding It to the EVEREST Score for Risk Assessment in Heart Failure.” (Can J Cardiol) 2020 — description and validation context of the EVEREST score.
    Integrative reviews and guideline summaries describing EVEREST score use and interpretation.

Discussion


No discussions yet. Be the first to comment.

Report this Tool