Search

Background: Treatment for partners of patients diagnosed with sexually transmitted infections (STI), referred to as expedited partner therapy (EPT), is infrequently used in the emergency department (ED). This was a pilot program to initiate and evaluate EPT through medication-in-hand ("take-home") kits or paper prescriptions. In this study we aimed to assess the frequency of EPT prescribing, the efficacy of a randomized best practice advisory (BPA) on the uptake, perceptions of emergency clinicians regarding the EPT pilot, and factors associated with EPT prescribing. Methods: We conducted this pilot study at an academic ED in the midwestern US between August-October 2021. The primary outcome of EPT prescription uptake and the BPA impact was measured via chart abstraction and analyzed through summary statistics and the Fisher exact test. We analyzed the secondary outcome of barriers and facilitators to program implementation through ED staff interviews (physicians, physician assistants, and nurses). We used a rapid qualitative assessment method for the analysis of the interviews. Results: During the study period, 52 ED patients were treated for chlamydia/gonorrhea, and EPT was offered to 25% (95% CI 15%-39%) of them. Expedited partner therapy was prescribed significantly more often (42% vs 8%; P < 0.01) when the interruptive pop-up alert BPA was shown compared to not shown. Barriers identified in the interviews included workflow constraints and knowledge of EPT availability. The BPA was viewed positively by the majority of participants. Conclusion: In this pilot EPT program, expedited partner therapy was provided to 25% of ED patients who appeared eligible to receive it. The interruptive pop-up alert BPA significantly increased EPT prescribing. Barriers identified to EPT prescribing should be the subject of future interventions to improve provision of EPT from the emergency department. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Standard of care for patients with acute ischemic stroke from large vessel occlusion (AISLVO) includes prompt evaluation for urgent mechanical thrombectomy (MT) at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC). During the start of the coronavirus 2019 pandemic (COVID-19), there were reports about disruption to emergency department (ED) operations and delays in management of patients with AIS-LVO. In this study we investigate the outcome and operations for patients who were transferred from different EDs to an academic CSC’s critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU), which specializes in expeditious transfer of time-sensitive disease. Methods: This was a pre-post retrospective study using prospectively collected clinical data from our CSC’s stroke registry. Adult patients who were transferred from any ED to the CCRU and underwent MT were eligible. We compared time intervals in the pre-pandemic (PP) period between January 2018- February 2020, such as ED in-out and CCRU arrival-angiography, to those during the pandemic (DP) between March 2020-May 31, 2021. We used classification and regression tree (CART) analysis to identify which time intervals, besides clinical factors, were associated with good neurological outcome (90-day modified Rankin scale 0-2). Results: We analyzed 203 patients: 135 (66.5%) in the PP group and 68 (33.5%) in the DP group. Time from ED triage to computed tomography (difference 7 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI]-12 to-1, P < 0.01) for the DP group was statistically longer, but ED in-out was similar for both groups. Time from CCRU arrival to angiography (difference 9 minutes, 95% CI 4-13, P < 0.01) for the DP group was shorter. Forty-nine percent of the DP group achieved mRS ≤ 2 vs 32% for the PP group (difference-17%, 95% CI-0.32 to-0.03, P < 0.01). The CART identified initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, age, ED inand-out time, and CCRU arrival-to-angiography time as important predictors of good outcome. Conclusion: Overall, the care process in EDs and at this single CSC for patients requiring MT were not heavily affected by the pandemic, as certain time metrics during the pandemic were statistically shorter than pre-pandemic intervals. Time intervals such as ED in-and-out and CCRU arrival-to-angiography were important factors in achieving good neurologic outcomes. Further study is necessary to confirm our observation and improve operational efficiency in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As opioid overdose deaths continue to rise, the emergency department (ED) remains an important point of contact for many at risk for overdose. In this study our purpose was to better understand the attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge of ED nurses in caring for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We hypothesized a difference in training received and attitudes toward caring for patients with OUD between nurses with <5 years and ≥6 years of clinical experience. Methods: We conducted a survey among ED nurses in a large academic medical center from May-July 2022. All ED staff nurses were surveyed. Data entry instruments for the nursing surveys were programmed in Qualtrics, and we analyzed results R using a chi-square test or Fisher exact test to compare nurses with <5 years and ≥6 years of clinical experience. A P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: We distributed 74 surveys, and 69 were completed (93%). Attitudes toward naloxone distribution from the ED were positive, with 72% of respondents reporting they were “very” or “extremely” supportive of distributing naloxone kits to individuals at risk of overdose. While attitudes were positive, barriers included limited time, lack of system support, and cost. Level of comfort in caring for patients with OUD was high, with 78% of respondents “very” or “extremely” comfortable. More education is needed on overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) with respondents 38% and 45% “a little” or “somewhat” comfortable, respectively. Nurses with <5 years of experience reported receiving more training on OEND in nursing school compared to those with ≥6 years of experience (P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in reported attitudes, knowledge, or comfort in caring for patients with OUD. Conclusion: In this single-center survey, we found ED nurses were supportive of overdose education and naloxone distribution. There are opportunities for targeted education and addressing systemic barriers to OEND. All interventions should be evaluated to gauge impact on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chest pain is the second most common chief complaint for patients undergoing evaluation in emergency departments (ED) in the United States. The American Heart Association recommends immediate physician interpretation of all electrocardiograms (ECG) performed for adults with chest pain within 10 minutes to evaluate for the finding of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The ECG machines provide computerized interpretation of each ECG, potentially obviating the need for immediate physician analysis; however, the reliability of computer-interpreted findings of "normal" or "otherwise normal" ECG to rule out STEMI requiring immediate intervention in the ED is unknown. Methods: We performed a prospective cohort analysis of 2,275 ECGs performed in triage in the adultED of a single academic medical center, comparing the computerized interpretations of "normal" and "otherwise normal" ECGs to those of attending cardiologists. ECGs were obtained with a GE MAC 5500 machine and interpreted using Marquette 12SL. Results: In our study population, a triage ECGwith a computerized interpretation of "normal" or "otherwise normal" ECG had a negative predictive value of 100% for STEMI (one-sided, lower 97.5% confidence interval 99.6%). None of the studied patients with these ECG interpretations had a final diagnosis of STEMI, acute coronary syndrome, or other diagnosis requiring emergent cardiac catheterization. Conclusion: In our study population, ECG machine interpretations of "normal" or "otherwise normal" ECG excluded findings of STEMI. The ECGs with these computerized interpretations could safely wait for physician interpretation until the time of patient evaluation without delaying an acute STEMI diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has seriously impacted clinical research operations in academic medical centers due to social distancing measures and stay-at-home orders. The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation of a program to continue clinical research based out of an emergency department (ED) using remote research associates (RA). Methods: Remote RAs were trained and granted remote access to the electronic health record (EHR) by the health system’s core information technology team. Upon gaining access, remote RAs used a dual-authentication process to gain access to a host-based, firewall-protected virtual network where the EHR could be accessed to continue screening and enrollment for ongoing studies. Study training for screening and enrollment was also provided to ensure study continuity. Results: With constant support and guidance available to establish this EHR access pathway, the remote RAs were able to gain access relatively independently and without major technical troubleshooting. Each remote RA was granted access and trained on studies within one week and self-reported a high degree of program satisfaction, EHR access ease, and study protocol comfort through informal evaluation surveys. Conclusions: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we virtualized a clinical research program to continue important ED-based studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Healthcare contributes 10% of greenhouse gases in the United States and generates two milion tons of waste each year. Reducing healthcare waste can reduce the environmental impact of healthcare and lower hospitals’ waste disposal costs. However, no literature to date has examined US emergency department (ED) waste management. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe the amount of waste generated by an ED, identify deviations from waste policy, and explore areas for waste reduction. Methods: We conducted a 24-hour (weekday) ED waste audit in an urban, tertiary-care academic medical center. All waste generated in the ED during the study period was collected, manually sorted into separate categories based on its predominant material, and weighed. We tracked deviations from hospital waste policy using the hospital’s Infection Control Manual, state regulations, and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act standards. Lastly, we calculated direct pollutant emissions from ED waste disposal activities using the M+Waste Care Calculator. Results: The ED generated 671.8 kilograms (kg) total waste during a 24-hour collection period. On a per-patient basis, the ED generated 1.99 kg of total waste per encounter. The majority was plastic (64.6%), with paper-derived products (18.4%) the next largest category. Only 14.9% of waste disposed of in red bags met the criteria for regulated medical waste. We identified several deviations from waste policy, including loose sharps not placed in sharps containers, as well as re-processable items and protected health information thrown in medical and solid waste. We also identified over 200 unused items. Pollutant emissions resulting per day from ED waste disposal include 3110 kg carbon dioxide equivalent and 576 grams of other criteria pollutants, heavy metals, and toxins. Conclusion: The ED generates significant amounts of waste. Current ED waste disposal practices reveal several opportunities to reduce total waste generated, increase adherence to waste policy, and reduce environmental impact. While our results will likely be similar to other urban tertiary EDs that serve as Level I trauma centers, future studies are needed to compare results across EDs with different patient volumes or waste generation rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Prior research has demonstrated that men and women emergency medicine (EM) residents receive similar numerical evaluations at the beginning of residency, but that women receive significantly lower scores than men in their final year. To better understand the emergence of this gender gap in evaluations we examined discrepancies between numerical scores and the sentiment of attached textual comments. Methods: This multicenter, longitudinal, retrospective cohort study took place at four geographically diverse academic EM training programs across the United States from July 1, 2013-July 1, 2015 using a real-time, mobile-based, direct-observation evaluation tool. We used complementary quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze 11,845 combined numerical and textual evaluations made by 151 attending physicians (94 men and 57 women) during real-time, direct observations of 202 residents (135 men and 67 women). Results: Numerical scores were more strongly positively correlated with positive sentiment of the textual comment for men (r = 0.38, P < 0.001) compared to women (r = -0.26, P < 0.04); more strongly negatively correlated with mixed (r = -0.39, P < 0.001) and negative (r = -0.46, P < 0.001) sentiment for men compared to women (r = -0.13, P < 0.28) for mixed sentiment (r = -0.22, P < 0.08) for negative; and women were around 11% more likely to receive positive comments alongside lower scores, and negative or mixed comments alongside higher scores. Additionally, on average, men received slightly more positive comments in postgraduate year (PGY)-3 than in PGY-1 and fewer mixed and negative comments, while women received fewer positive and negative comments in PGY-3 than PGY-1 and almost the same number of mixed comments. Conclusion: Women EM residents received more inconsistent evaluations than men EM residents at two levels: 1) inconsistency between numerical scores and sentiment of textual comments; and 2) inconsistency in the expected career trajectory of improvement over time. These findings reveal gender inequality in how attendings evaluate residents and suggest that attendings should be trained to provide all residents with feedback that is clear, consistent, and helpful, regardless of resident gender. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Emergency Medicine, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires frequent and routine feedback. It is a common challenge for program leadership to obtain adequate and effective summative evaluations. Methods: This is a retrospective, case-crossover, interventional study conducted in an academic medical center. This study occurred over a two-year period, with an intervention between years one and two. Throughout year two of the study, faculty incentive compensation was linked to completion of end-of-shift evaluations. We compared pre- an post-implementation data using paired sample t-tests with the significance level P < .05 applied. Results: After implementation of the incentive metric there was an increase in the number of total evaluations by 42% (P = .001). The mean number of evaluations submitted by each faculty per shift increased from 0.45 to 0.86 (SD 0.56, P < .001). Overall, 32 of the 38 faculty members (84.2%) had an increase in the number of evaluations submitted per shift during the intervention period with an average increase of 0.5 evaluations per shift (range 0.01-1.54). Conclusion: Incentivizing faculty to submit resident evaluations through use of bonus compensation increased the number of evaluations at our institution. This information may be applied by other programs to increase resident evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Emergency departments (ED) provide trauma-informed care to sexual assault (SA) survivors and connect them with comprehensive services. Through surveying SA survivor advocates, we aimed to 1) document updated trends in the quality of care and resources offered to SA survivors and 2) identify potential disparities according to geographic regions in the US, urban vs rural clinic locations, and the availability of sexual assault nurse examiners (SANE). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study between June-August 2021, surveying SA advocates who were dispatched from rape crisis centers to support survivors during ED care. Survey questions addressed two major themes in quality of care: staff preparedness to provide traumaresponse care; and available resources. Staff preparedness to provide trauma-informed care was assessed through observations of staff behaviors. We used Wilcoxon rank-sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests to analyze differences in responses according to geographic regions and SANE presence. Results: A total of 315 advocates from 99 crisis centers completed the survey. The survey had a participation rate of 88.7% and a completion rate of 87.9%. Advocates who indicated that a higher proportion of their cases were attended by SANEs were more likely to report higher rates of traumainformed staff behaviors. For example, the recalled rate of staff asking patients for consent at every step of the exam was significantly associated with SANE presence (P < 0.001). With respect to access to resources, 66.7% of advocates reported that hospitals often or always have evidence collection kits available; 30.6% reported that resources such as transportation and housing are often or always available, and 55.3% reported that SANEs are often or always part of the care team. The SANEs were reported to be more frequently available in the Southwest than in other US regions (P < 0.001) and in urban as opposed to rural areas (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Our study indicates that support from sexual assault nurse examiners is highly associated with trauma-informed staff behaviors and comprehensive resources. Urban-rural and regional disparities exist regarding access to SANEs, suggesting that elevating nationwide quality and equity in care of survivors of sexual assault requires increased investments in SANE training and coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]