Western Journal of Emergency Medicine最新文献

Introduction: Interruptions that occur during sign-out in the emergency department (ED) may affect workflow, quality of care, patient safety, errors in documentation, and resident education. Our objective in this study was to determine the frequency and classification (emergent vs non-emergent, in-person vs phone call) of interruptions that occur during emergency medicine (EM) resident sign-out before and after the institution of a group sign-out process involving residents and attending physicians.

Methods: A convenience sample of sign-out observations between EM residents were observed and coded between April-December 2021. We excluded sign-out observations of pediatric patients (<18 years of age) and observations not conducted in the main ED. Collected data included number of patients signed out during each observation; total duration in minutes for each observation; total number of interruptions during each observation; and type of interruption (emergent vs non-emergent, in-person vs phone call). We further stratified data before and after the institution of a group sign-out process (July 2021).

Results: We performed data analysis on 58 individual and 65 group sign-out observations, respectively. Although the total number of patients signed out, the total duration of sign-outs observed, mean number of patients signed out per minute, and mean duration of sign-out per observation were more for the group sign-out aggregate compared with the individual sign-out aggregate, the total number of interruptions (44 vs 73, P = 0.007), number of interruptions per minute (0.05 vs 0.16, P < 0.001), total number of non-emergent interruptions (38 vs. 67, P = 0.005), and total number of in-person interruptions (14 vs 44, P < 0.001) was less in the group sign-out compared with the individual sign-out totals.

Conclusion: Based on our sample, although the total duration of group sign-out with both residents and an attending was longer than individual resident-to-resident sign-out, the total number of interruptions, number of interruptions per minute, total number of non-emergent interruptions, and total number of in-person interruptions was less in the group sign-out. Group sign-out may be an option to limit the negative effects of interruptions in the ED.

Introduction: People without reliable access to healthcare are more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage cancer that could have been treated more effectively if diagnosed earlier. Emergency departments (ED) may be a novel place for cancer screening education for underserved patients. In this study we sought to determine patient characteristics and barriers to cancer screening for those patients who presented to a large, academic safety-net ED and were overdue for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening since the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods: Adult ED patients eligible for at least one cancer screening based on US Preventive Serivces Task Force guidelines completed a web-based survey. We examined the association of demographic characteristics and having a personal physician with being overdue on screening using chi-square or the Fisher exact test for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous variables.

Results: Of 221 participants, 144 were eligible for colorectal, 96 for cervical, and 55 for breast cancer screening. Of eligible patients, 46% (25/55) were overdue for breast cancer screening, 43% (62/144) for colorectal, and 40% (38/96) for cervical cancer screening. There were no significant characteristics associated with breast cancer screening. Being overdue for cervical cancer screening was significantly more likely for patients who were of Asian race (P = 0.02), had less than a high school diploma (P = 0.01), and were without a routine checkup within the prior five years (P = 0.01). Overdue for colorectal cancer screening was associated with patients not having insurance (P = 0.04), being in their 40s (P = 0.03), being Hispanic (P = 0.01), and not having a primary care physician (P=0.01). Of 97 patients overdue for at least one screening, the most common barriers were cost (37%), lack of time (37%), and lack of knowledge of screening recommendations (34%). Only 8.3% reported that the COVID-19 pandemic delayed their screening.

Conclusion: The ED may be a novel setting to target patients for cancer screening education. Future work that refers patients to free screening programs and primary care physicians may help improve disparities in cancer screening and cancer mortality rates for underserved populations.

Introduction: Identification of patients not meeting catheterization laboratory activation criteria by electrocardiogram (ECG) but who would benefit from early coronary intervention remains challenging in the emergency department (ED). The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether emergency physician (EP)-performed point-of-care transthoracic echocardiography (POC TTE) could help identify patients who required coronary intervention within this population.

Methods: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of adult patients who presented to two EDs between 2018-2020. Patients were included if they received a POC TTE and underwent diagnostic coronary angiography within 72 hours of ED presentation. We excluded patients meeting catheterization laboratory activation criteria on initial ED ECG. Ultrasound studies were independently reviewed for presence of regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMA) by two blinded ultrasound fellowship-trained EPs. We then calculated test characteristics for coronary intervention.

Results: Of the 221 patient encounters meeting inclusion criteria, 104 (47%) received coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) referral. Overall prevalence of RWMA on POC TTE was 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-42%). Presence of RWMA had 38% (95% CI 29-49%) sensitivity and 68% (95% CI 58-76%) specificity for coronary intervention/CABG referral. Presence of "new" RWMA (presence on EP-performed POC TTE and prior normal echocardiogram) had 43% (95% CI 10-82%) sensitivity and 93% (95% CI 66-100%) specificity for coronary intervention/CABG referral. The EP-performed POC TTE interpretation of RWMA had 57% (95% CI 47-67%) sensitivity and 96% (95% CI 87-100%) specificity for presence of RWMA on subsequent cardiology echocardiogram during the same admission.

Conclusion: Presence of RWMA on EP-performed POC TTE had limited sensitivity or specificity for coronary intervention or referral to CABG. The observed specificity appeared to trend higher in subjects with a prior echocardiogram demonstrating absence of RWMA, although a larger sample size will be required to confirm this finding. The EP-performed POC TTE RWMA had high specificity for presence of RWMA on subsequent cardiology echocardiogram. Further evaluation of the diagnostic performance of new RWMA on EP-performed POC TTE with a dedicated cohort is warranted.

Introduction: The point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) score has been used in coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients for diagnosis and risk stratification, due to excellent sensitivity and infection control concerns. We studied the ratio of partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood to the fraction of inspiratory oxygen concentration (PO₂/FiO₂), intubation rates, and mortality correlation to the LUS score.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review using PRISMA guidelines. Included were articles published from December 1, 2019-November 30, 2021 using LUS in adult COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit or the emergency department. Excluded were studies on animals and on pediatric and pregnant patients. We assessed bias using QUADAS-2. Outcomes were LUS score and correlation to PO2/FiO2, intubation, and mortality rates. Random effects model pooled the meta-analysis results.

Results: We reviewed 27 of 5,267 studies identified. Of the 27 studies, seven were included in the intubation outcome, six in the correlation to PO₂/FiO₂ outcome, and six in the mortality outcome. Heterogeneity was found in ultrasound protocols and outcomes. In the pooled results of 267 patients, LUS score was found to have a strong negative correlation to PO₂/FiO₂ with a correlation coefficient of -0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.75, -0.62). In pooled results, 273 intubated patients had a mean LUS score that was 6.95 points higher (95% CI 4.58-9.31) than that of 379 non-intubated patients. In the mortality outcome, 385 survivors had a mean LUS score that was 4.61 points lower (95% CI 3.64-5.58) than that of 181 non-survivors. There was significant heterogeneity between the studies as measured by the I² and Cochran Q test.

Conclusion: A higher LUS score was strongly correlated with a decreasing PO₂/FiO₂ in COVID-19 pneumonia patients. The LUS score was significantly higher in intubated vs non-intubated patients with COVID-19. The LUS score was significantly lower in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia that survive.

Introduction: Historically, there have been no systematic programs for teaching peer review, leaving trainees to learn by trial and error. Recently, a number of publications have advocated for programs where experienced reviewers mentor trainees to more efficiently acquire this knowledge.

Objective: Our goal was to develop an introductory learning experience that intentionally fosters peer-review skills.

Methods: The Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) offered education fellowship directors the opportunity to mentor their fellows by reviewing submitted manuscript(s) supplemented by educational material provided by their journal. Reviews were collaboratively created. The decision letter that was sent to manuscript authors was also sent to the mentees; it included all reviewers' and editor's comments, as feedback. In 2022, fellows received a post-experience survey regarding prior experiences and their perspectives of the mentored peer-review experience.

Results: From 2020-2022, participation grew from 14 to 30 education fellowships, providing 76 manuscript peer reviews. The 2022 survey-response rate of 87% (20/23) revealed that fellows were inexperienced in education scholarship prior to participation: 30% had authored an education paper, and 10% had performed peer review of an education manuscript. Overall, participants were enthusiastic about the program and anxious to participate the following year. In addition, participants identified a number of benefits of the mentored experience including improved understanding of the scholarship process; informing fellows' scholarly pursuits; improved conceptualization of concepts learned elsewhere in training; and learning through exposure to scholarship.

Conclusion: This program's early findings suggest that collaboration between academic societies and interested graduate medical education faculty has the potential to formalize the process of learning peer review, benefitting all involved stakeholders.

Introduction: Timely diagnosis of patients affected by an emerging infectious disease plays a crucial role in treating patients and avoiding disease spread. In prior research, we developed an approach by using machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict serious acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection based on clinical features of patients visiting an emergency department (ED) during the early coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In this study, we aimed to externally validate this approach within a distinct ED population.

Methods: To create our training/validation cohort (model development) we collected data retrospectively from suspected COVID-19 patients at a US ED from February 23-May 12, 2020. Another dataset was collected as an external validation (testing) cohort from an ED in another country from May 12-June 15, 2021. Clinical features including patient demographics and triage information were used to train and test the models. The primary outcome was the confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, defined as a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test result for SARS-CoV-2. We employed three different ML algorithms, including gradient boosting, random forest, and extra trees classifiers, to construct the predictive model. The predictive performances were evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in the testing cohort.

Results: In total, 580 and 946 ED patients were included in the training and testing cohorts, respectively. Of them, 98 (16.9%) and 180 (19.0%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. All the constructed ML models showed acceptable discrimination, as indicated by the AUC. Among them, random forest (0.785, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.747-0.822) performed better than gradient boosting (0.774, 95% CI 0.739-0.811) and extra trees classifier (0.72, 95% CI 0.677-0.762). There was no significant difference between the constructed models.

Conclusion: Our study validates the use of ML for predicting COVID-19 in the ED and demonstrates its potential for predicting emerging infectious diseases based on models built by clinical features with temporal and spatial heterogeneity. This approach holds promise for scenarios where effective diagnostic tools for an emerging infectious disease may be lacking in the future.

Introduction: Consideration of the cost of care and value in healthcare is now a recognized element of physician training. Despite the urgency to educate trainees in high-value care (HVC), educational curricula and evaluation of these training paths remain limited, especially with respect to emergency medicine (EM) residents. We aimed to complete a needs assessment and evaluate curricular preferences for instruction on HVC among EM residents.

Methods: This was a qualitative, exploratory study using content analysis of two focus groups including a total of eight EM residents from a single Midwestern EM residency training program. Participants also completed a survey questionnaire.

Results: There were two themes. Within the overall theme of resident experience with and perception of HVC, we found five sub-themes: 1) understanding of HVC focuses on diagnosis and decision-making; 2) concern about patient costs, including the effects on patients' lives and their ability to engage with recommended outpatient care; 3) conflict between internal beliefs and external expectations, including patients' perceptions of value; 4) approach to HVC changes with increasing clinical experience; and 5) slow-moving, political discussion around HVC. Within the overall theme of desired education and curricular design, we identified four sub-themes: 1) limited prior education on HVC and health economics; 2) motivation to receive training on HVC and health economics; 3) desire for discussion-based format for HVC curriculum; and 4) curriculum targeted to level of training. Respondents indicated greatest acceptability of interactive, discussion-based formats.

Discussion: We conducted a targeted needs assessment for HVC among EM residents. We identified broad interest in the topic and limited self-reported baseline knowledge. Curricular content may benefit from incorporating resident concerns about patient costs and conflict between external expectations and internal beliefs about HVC. Curricular design may benefit from a focus on interactive, discussion-based modalities and tailoring to the learner's level of training.

Introduction: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are increasingly common among patients with heart failure. The unique physiologic characteristics of patients with LVADs present a challenge to emergency clinicians making treatment and disposition decisions. Despite the increasing prevalence of LVADs, literature describing emergency department (ED) visits among this population is sparse. We aimed to describe clinical characteristics and outcomes among patients with LVADs seen in two quaternary-care EDs in a five-year period. Secondarily, we sought to evaluate mortality rates and ED return rates for bridge to transplant (BTT) and destination therapy (DT) patients.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients known to have an LVAD who were evaluated in two quaternary-care EDs from 2013-2017. Data were collected from the electronic health record and summarized with descriptive statistics. We assessed patient outcomes with mixed-effects logistic regression models including a random intercept to account for patients with multiple ED visits.

Results: During the five-year study period, 290 ED visits among 107 patients met inclusion criteria. The median patient age was 61 years. The reason for LVAD implantation was BTT in 150 encounters (51.7%) and DT in 140 (48.3%). The most common presenting concerns were dyspnea (21.7%), bleeding (18.6%), and chest pain (11.4%). Visits directly related to the LVAD were infrequent (7.9%). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator discharge was reported in 3.4% of visits. A majority of patients were dismissed home from the ED (53.8%), and 4.5% required intensive care unit admission. Among all patients, 37.9% returned to the ED within 30 days, with similar rates between DT and BTT patients (32.1 vs 43.3%; P = 0.055). The LVAD was replaced in three cases (1.0%) during hospitalization. No deaths occurred in the ED, and the mortality rate within 30 days was 2.1% among all patients.

Conclusion: In this multicenter cohort study of ED visits among patients with an LVAD, dyspnea, bleeding, and chest pain were the most common presenting concerns. Visits directly related to the LVAD were uncommon. Approximately half of patients were dismissed home, although return ED visits were common.

Introduction: Euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (glucose <250 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) has increased in recognition since introduction of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors but remains challenging to diagnose and manage without the hyperglycemia that is otherwise central to diagnosing DKA, and with increased risk for hypoglycemia with insulin use. Our objective was to compare key resource utilization and safety outcomes between patients with euglycemic and hyperglycemic DKA from the same period.

Methods: This is a retrospective review of adult emergency department patients in DKA at an academic medical center. Patients were included if they were >18 years old, met criteria for DKA on initial laboratories (pH ≤7.30, serum bicarbonate ≤18 millimoles per liter [mmol/L], anion gap ≥10), and were managed via a standardized DKA order set. Patients were divided into euglycemic (<250 milligrams per deciliter [mg/dL]) vs hyperglycemic (≥250 mg/dL) cohorts by presenting glucose. We extracted and analyzed patient demographics, resource utilization, and safety outcomes. Etiologies of euglycemia were obtained by manual chart review. For comparisons between groups we used independent-group t-tests for continuous variables and chi-squared tests for binary variables, with alpha 0.05.

Results: We identified 629 patients with DKA: 44 euglycemic and 585 hyperglycemic. Euglycemic patients had milder DKA on presentation (higher pH and bicarbonate, lower anion gap; P < 0.05) and lower initial glucose (195 vs 561 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and potassium (4.3 vs 5.3 mmol/L, P < 0.001). Etiologies of euglycemia were insulin use prior to arrival (57%), poor oral intake with baseline insulin use (29%), and SGLT2 inhibitor use (14%). Mean time on insulin infusion was shorter for those with euglycemic DKA: 13.5 vs 19.4 hours, P = 0.003. Mean times to first bicarbonate >18 mmol/L and first long-acting insulin were similar. Incidence of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) while on insulin infusion was significantly higher for those with euglycemic DKA (18.2 vs 4.8%, P = 0.02); incidence of hypokalemia (<3.3 mmol/L) was 27.3 vs 19.1% (P = 0.23).

Conclusion: Compared to hyperglycemic DKA patients managed in the same protocolized fashion, euglycemic DKA patients were on insulin infusions 5.9 hours less, yet experienced hypoglycemia over three times more frequently. Future work can investigate treatment strategies for euglycemic DKA to minimize adverse events, especially iatrogenic hypoglycemia.