Academic Emergency Medicine最新文献

Background: Prior research has provided retrospective validity evidence for an abbreviated Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to measure burnout among emergency medicine (EM) residents. We sought to provide additional validity and reliability evidence for the two-factor, six-item abbreviated CBI.

Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the abbreviated CBI that was administered following the 2022 American Board of Emergency Medicine In-training Examination. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and the prevalence of burnout among EM residents was determined.

Results: Of the 8918 eligible residents, 7465 (83.7%) completed the abbreviated CBI. CFA confirmed the previously developed model of two factors using six items answered with a 1- to 5-point Likert scale. The internal factor was derived from personal and work-related burnout and the external factor was related to caring for patients. The reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha (0.87). The overall prevalence of burnout was 49.4%; the lowest prevalence was at the EM1 level (43.1%) and the highest was at the EM2 level (53.8%).

Conclusions: CFA of the abbreviated CBI demonstrated good reliability and model fit. The two-factor, six-item survey instrument identified an increase in the prevalence of burnout among EM residents that coincided with working in the COVID-19 environment. The abbreviated CBI has sufficient reliability and validity evidence to encourage its broader use.

Background: Academic emergency medicine (EM) is foundational to the EM specialty through the development of new knowledge and clinical training of resident physicians. Despite recent increased attention to the future of the EM workforce, no evaluations have specifically characterized the U.S. academic EM workforce. We sought to estimate the national proportion of emergency physicians (EPs) identified as academic and the proportion of emergency department (ED) visits that take place at academic sites.

Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of EPs and EDs using data from the American Hospital Association, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Doximity's Residency Navigator. EPs were identified as "academic" if they were affiliated with at least one facility determined to be academic, defined as EDs officially designated by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) as clinical training sites at accredited EM residency programs. Our primary outcomes were to estimate the national proportion of EPs identified as academic and the proportion of ED visits performed at academic sites.

Results: Our analytic sample included 26,937 EPs practicing clinically across 4920 EDs and providing care during 130,471,386 ED visits. Among EPs, 11,720 (43.5%) were identified as academic, and among EDs, 635 (12.9%) were identified as academic sites, including 585 adult/general sites, 45 pediatric-specific sites, and 10 sites affiliated with the Department of Veterans Affairs. In 2021, academic EDs provided care for 42,794,106 ED visits or 32.8% of all ED visits nationally.

Conclusions: Approximately four in 10 EPs practice in at least one clinical training site affiliated with an ACGME-accredited EM residency program, and approximately one in three ED visits nationally occur in these academic EDs. We encourage further work using alternative definitions of an academic EPs and EDs, along with longitudinal research to identify trends in the workforce's composition.

Background: Emergency department (ED) crowding has repercussions on acute care, contributing to prolonged wait times, length of stay, and left without being seen (LWBS). These indicators are regarded as systemic shortcomings, reflecting a failure to provide equitable and accessible acute care. The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving ED care delivery indicators.

Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing ED interventions aimed at reducing key metrics of time to provider (TTP), time to disposition (TTD), and LWBS. We excluded disease-specific trials (e.g., stroke). We used Cochrane's revised tool to assess the risk of bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations to rate the quality of evidence. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and Cochrane Q test for heterogeneity. Data were summarized as means (±SD) for continuous variables and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other major databases. A total of 1850 references were scanned and 20 RCTs were selected for inclusion. The trials reported at least one of the three outcomes of TTD, TTP, or LWBS. Most interventions focused on triage liaison physician and point-of-care (POC) testing. Others included upfront expedited workup (ordering tests before full evaluation by a provider), scribes, triage kiosks, and sending notifications to consultants or residents. POC testing decreased TTD by an average of 5-96 min (high heterogeneity) but slightly increased TTP by a mean difference of 2 min (95% CI 0.6-4 min). Utilizing a triage liaison physician reduced TTD by 28 min (95% CI 19-37 min; moderate-quality evidence) and was more effective in reducing LWBS than routine triage (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66-0.88; moderate quality).

Conclusions: Operational strategies such as POC testing and triage liaison physicians could mitigate the impact of ED crowding and appear to be effective. The current evidence supports these strategies when tailored to the appropriate practice environment.