Search

History and physical exam are key features to narrow the differential diagnosis of central versus peripheral causes in patients presenting with acute vertigo. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of physical exam findings.Patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question, (P) adult ED patients with vertigo/dizziness; (I) presence/absence of specific physical exam findings; (O) central (ischemic stroke, hemorrhage, others) versus peripheral etiology. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was assessed.From 6,309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 43 met the inclusion criteria. General Neurologic Exam: 5 studies, 869 patients, pooled sensitivity 46.8% (CI 32.3%-61.9%, moderate certainty) and specificity 92.8% (CI 75.7%-98.1%, low certainty). Limb weakness/Hemiparesis: 4 studies, 893 patients, sensitivity 11.4% (5.1%-23.6%, high) and specificity 98.5% (97.1%-99.2%, high). Truncal/Gait Ataxia: 10 studies, 1,810 patients. Increasing severity of truncal ataxia had an increasing sensitivity for central etiology. Sensitivity 69.7% (43.3%-87.9%, low) and specificity 83.7% (52.1%-96.0%, low). Dysmetria signs: 4 studies, 1,135 patients, sensitivity 24.6% (15.6%-36.5%, high) and specificity 97.8% (94.4%-99.2%, high). Head Impulse Test (HIT): 17 studies, 1,366 patients, sensitivity 76.8% (64.4%-85.8%, low) and specificity 89.1% (75.8%-95.6%, moderate). Spontaneous Nystagmus: 6 studies, 621 patients, sensitivity 52.3% (29.8%-74.0%, moderate) and specificity 42.0% (15.5%-74.1%, moderate). Nystagmus Type: 16 studies, 1,366 patients. Bidirectional, vertical, direction changing, or pure torsional nystagmus are consistent with a central cause of vertigo. Sensitivity 50.7% (41.1%-60.2%, moderate) and specificity 98.5% (91.7%-99.7%, moderate). Test of Skew: 15 studies, 1,150 patients. Skew deviation is abnormal and consistent with central etiology. Sensitivity was 23.7% (15%-35.4%, moderate) and specificity 97.6% (96%-98.6%, moderate). HINTS (Head Impulse, Nystagmus, Test of Skew): 14 studies, 1,781 patients, sensitivity 92.9% (79.1%-97.9%, high), specificity 83.4% (69.6%-91.7%, moderate). HINTS+: 5 studies, 342 patients, sensitivity 99.0% (73.6%-100%, high) and specificity 84.8% (70.1%-93.0%, high).Most neurological exam findings have low sensitivity and high specificity for a central cause in patients with acute vertigo or dizziness. In acute vestibular syndrome (monophasic, continuous, persistent dizziness), HINTS and HINTS+ have high sensitivity when performed by trained clinicians.

Medical encounters require an efficient and focused history of present illness (HPI) to create differential diagnoses and guide diagnostic testing and treatment. Our aim was to compare the HPI of notes created by an automated digital intake tool versus standard medical notes created by clinicians.Prospective trial in a quaternary academic Emergency Department (ED). Notes were compared using the 5-point Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (PDQI-9) scale and the Centers for MedicareMedicaid Services (CMS) level of complexity index. Reviewers were board certified emergency medicine physicians blinded to note origin. Reviewers received training and calibration prior to note assessments. A difference of 1 point was considered clinically significant. Analysis included McNemar's (binary), Wilcoxon-rank (Likert), and agreement with Cohen's Kappa.A total of 148 ED medical encounters were charted by both digital note and standard clinical note. The ability to capture patient information was assessed through comparison of note content across paired charts (digital-standard note on the same patient), as well as scores given by the reviewers. Reviewer agreement was kappa 0.56 (CI 0.49-0.64), indicating moderate level of agreement between reviewers scoring the same patient chart. Considering all 18 questions across PDQI-9 and CMS scales, the average agreement between standard clinical note and digital note was 54.3% (IQR 44.4-66.7%). There was a moderate level of agreement between content of standard and digital notes (kappa 0.54, 95%CI 0.49-0.60). The quality of the digital note was within the 1 point clinically significant difference for all of the attributes, except for conciseness. Digital notes had a higher frequency of CMS severity elements identified.Digitally generated clinical notes had moderate agreement compared to standard clinical notes and within the one point clinically significant difference except for the conciseness attribute. Digital notes more reliably documented billing components of severity. The use of automated notes should be further explored to evaluate its utility in facilitating documentation of patient encounters.

Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute vertigo or dizziness represent a diagnostic challenge. Neuroimaging has variable indications and yield. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test accuracy of neuroimaging for patients presenting with acute vertigo or dizziness.An electronic search was designed following patient-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) question-(P) adult patients with acute vertigo or dizziness presenting to the ED; (I) neuroimaging including computed tomography (CT), CT angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), and ultrasound (US); (C) MRI/clinical criterion standard; and (O) central causes (stroke, hemorrhage, tumor, others) versus peripheral causes of symptoms. Articles were assessed in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to assess certainty of evidence in pooled estimates.We included studies that reported diagnostic test accuracy. From 6309 titles, 460 articles were retrieved, and 12 were included: noncontrast CT scan-six studies, 771 patients, pooled sensitivity 28.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.4%-48.5%, moderate certainty) and specificity 98.9% (95% CI 93.4%-99.8%, moderate certainty); MRI-five studies, 943 patients, sensitivity 79.8% (95% CI 71.4%-86.2%, high certainty) and specificity 98.8% (95% CI 96.2%-100%, high certainty); CTA-one study, 153 patients, sensitivity 14.3% (95% CI 1.8%-42.8%) and specificity 97.7% (95% CI 93.8%-99.6%), CT had higher sensitivity than CTA (21.4% and 14.3%) for central etiology; MRA-one study, 24 patients, sensitivity 60.0% (95% CI 26.2%-87.8%) and specificity 92.9% (95% CI 66.1%-99.8%); US-three studies, 258 patients, sensitivity ranged from 30% to 53.6%, specificity from 94.9% to 100%.Noncontrast CT has very low sensitivity and MRI will miss approximately one in five patients with stroke if imaging is obtained early after symptom onset. The evidence does not support neuroimaging as the only tool for ruling out stroke and other central causes in patients with acute dizziness or vertigo presenting to the ED.

To evaluate the association between potential emergency department (ED)-based modifiable risk factors and subsequent development of delirium among hospitalized older adults free of delirium at the time of ED stay.Observational cohort study of patients aged ≥75 years who screened negative for delirium in the ED, were subsequently admitted to the hospital, and had delirium screening performed within 48 h of admission. Potential ED-based risk factors for delirium included ED length of stay (LOS), administration of opioids, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, or anticholinergics, and the placement of urinary catheter while in the ED. Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.Among 472 patients without delirium in the ED (mean age 84 years, 54.2% females), 33 (7.0%) patients developed delirium within 48 h of hospitalization. The ED LOS of those who developed delirium was similar to those who did not develop delirium (312.1 vs 325.6 min, MD -13.5 min, CI -56.1 to 29.0). Patients who received opioids in the ED were as likely to develop delirium as those who did not receive opioids (7.2% vs 6.9%: OR 1.04, CI 0.44 to 2.48). Patients who received benzodiazepines had a higher risk of incident delirium, the difference was clinically but not statistically significant (37.3% vs 6.5%, OR 5.35, CI 0.87 to 23.81). Intermittent urinary catheterization (OR 2.05, CI 1.00 to 4.22) and Foley placement (OR 3.69, CI 1.55 to 8.80) were associated with a higher risk of subsequent delirium. After adjusting for presence of dementia, only Foley placement in the ED remained significantly associated with development of in-hospital delirium (adjusted OR 3.16, CI 1.22 to 7.53).ED LOS and ED opioid use were not associated with higher risk of incident delirium in this cohort. Urinary catheterization in the ED was associated with an increased risk of subsequent delirium. These findings can be used to design ED-based initiatives and increase delirium prevention efforts.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol in a population of undifferentiated, stable, and non-agitated patients receiving droperidol in the emergency department. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients aged ≥ 12 years of age who received low-dose droperidol (≤ 2.5 mg) for indications other than acute behavioral disturbances. QTc intervals were monitored in real-time during pre-specified observation periods in the ED. Primary outcome was variation of QTc interval after droperidol administration, defined as the maximum delta (change) of QTc interval. Other outcomes included proportion of patients with a QTc ≥ 500 ms after droperidol, delta ≥ +60 ms, and incidence of clinical adverse events. Patients were monitored up to 30 minutes after IV bolus and up to 46 minutes after infusion. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients were included (mean age 42.1 years, 66.2% females). The median dose of droperidol was 1.875 mg (range 0.625 mg, 2.5 mg) and 94.1% received droperidol for headache management. Most patients received droperidol as a 2-minute bolus (n = 41, 60.3%). The mean maximum delta of QTc interval after droperidol across all 68 patients was +29.9 ms (SD 15). A total of 12 patients (17.6%) experienced a QTc interval ≥ 500 ms during the observation period after droperidol, and 3 patients (4.4%) had a delta QTc ≥ +60 ms. There were no serious arrhythmias, such as TdP, or deaths among the 68 participants in this study (0/68). However, 13.2% (n=9) had at least one non-serious adverse event including restlessness and/or anxiety. CONCLUSION: The QTc interval slightly increased after droperidol administration, but these prolongations were brief, mostly below 500 msec and did not lead to serious arrhythmias. The yield of continuous cardiac monitoring in patients receiving low doses of droperidol is likely low.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the short-term mortality of adult patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with altered mental status (AMS) as compared to other common chief complaints. METHODS: Observational cohort study of adult patients (age ≥ 40) who presented to an academic ED over a 1-year period with five pre-specified complaints at ED triage: AMS, generalized weakness, chest pain, abdominal pain, and headache. Primary outcomes included 7- and 30-day mortality. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, acuity level, and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 9,850 ED visits were included for analysis from which 101 (1.0%) and 295 (3.0%) died within 7 and 30 days, respectively. Among 683 AMS visits, the 7-day mortality rate was 3.2%. Mortality was lower for all other chief complaints, including generalized weakness (17/1170, 1.5%), abdominal pain (32/3609, 0.9%), chest pain (26/3548, 0.7%), and headache (4/840, 0.5%). After adjusting for key confounders, patients presenting with AMS had a significantly higher risk of death within 7 days of ED arrival than patients presenting with chest pain (HR 3.72, 95% CI 2.05 to 6.76, p

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To derive a risk score that uses variables available early during the ED encounter to identify high-risk geriatric patients who may benefit from delirium screening. METHODS: This was an observational study of older adults age ≥ 75 years who presented to an academic ED and who were screened for delirium during their ED visit. Variable selection from candidate predictors was performed through a LASSO-penalized logistic regression. A risk score was derived from the final prediction model, and predictive accuracy characteristics were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: From the 967 eligible ED visits, delirium was detected in 107 (11.1%). The area under the curve for the REcognizing DElirium in Emergency Medicine (REDEEM) score was 0.901 (95% CI 0.864 to 0.938). The REEDEM risk score included 10 different variables (7 based on triage information and 3 obtained during early history taking) with a score ranging from −3 to 66. Using an optimal cutoff of ≥ 11, we found a sensitivity of 84.1% (90 of 107 ED delirium patients, 95% CI 75.5% to 90.2%) and a specificity of 86.6% (745 of 860 non-ED delirium patients, 95% CI 84.1% to 88.8%). A lower cutoff of ≥ 5 was found to minimize false negatives with an improved sensitivity at 91.6% (98 of 107 ED delirium patients, 95% CI 84.2% to 95.8%). CONCLUSION: A risk stratification score was derived with the potential to augment delirium recognition in geriatric ED patients. This has the potential to assist on delirium targeted screening of high-risk patients in the ED. Validation of REDEEM, however, is needed prior to implementation.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify risk factors for delirium in geriatric patients in the emergency department and to identify emergency department (ED)-based modifiable risk factors for developing delirium during hospitalization. We searched evidence based medicine reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for observational studies from the time of their inception to July 2020. We included studies that evaluated potential risk factors for either prevalent or incident delirium among older adults (age ≥ 60 years) presenting to the ED. When appropriate, we meta-analyzed estimates for risk factors using a random-effects model. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation approach. The study's protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42020175261). A total of 4,513 citations were reviewed, and 34 studies met the criteria for inclusion: 27 evaluating risk factors for ED delirium (13,412 patients) and 7 evaluating ED-based risk factors for developing delirium during hospitalization (2,238 patients). The prevalence of ED delirium ranged from 7% to 35%. Four factors had strong associations with ED delirium and were graded as high-certainty evidence, including nursing home residence (4 studies; odds ratio [OR], 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17 to 5.48), cognitive impairment (7 studies; OR, 4.46; 95% CI, 3.38 to 5.89), hearing impairment (3 studies, OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.03 to 6.41), and a history of stroke (3 studies; OR, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.17 to 8.75). The rate of developing delirium during hospitalization ranged from 11% to 27%. A length of stay of more than 10 hours in ED was associated with a higher risk of delirium (1 study; OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.13 to 4.41). One study reported that severe pain, rather than the use of opioids, was associated with the development of delirium. These findings can be used to prioritize delirium screening in the ED and develop novel ED delirium risk scores or prevention interventions.

To describe the emergency department (ED) triage of anaphylaxis patients based on the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), assess the association between ESI triage level and ED epinephrine administration, and determine characteristics associated with lower acuity triage ESI assignment (levels 3 and 4).We conducted a cohort study of adult and pediatric anaphylaxis patients between September 2010 and September 2018 at an academic ED. Patient characteristics and management were compared between Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage level 1 or 2 versus levels 3 or 4 using logistic regression analysis. We adhered to STROBE reporting guidelines.A total of 1090 patient visits were included. There were 26 (2%), 515 (47%), 489 (45%), and 60 (6%) visits that were assigned an ESI triage level of 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Epinephrine was administered in the ED to 53% of patients triaged ESI level 1 or 2 and to 40% of patients triaged ESI level 3 or 4. Patients who were assigned a lower acuity ESI level of 3 or 4 had a longer median time from ED arrival to epinephrine administration compared to those with a higher acuity ESI level of 1 or 2 (28 min compared to 13 min, p .001). A lower acuity ESI level was more likely to be assigned to visits with a chief concern of hives, rash, or pruritus (OR 2.33 [95% CI, 1.20-4.53]) and less likely to be assigned to visits among adults (OR, 0.43 [0.31-0.60]), patients who received epinephrine from emergency medical services (OR 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), presented with posterior pharyngeal or uvular angioedema (OR, 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), hypoxemia (OR, 0.34 [0.18-0.64]), or increased heart (OR 0.83 [0.73-0.95]) or respiratory (OR 0.70 [0.60-0.82]) rates.Patients triaged to lower acuity ESI levels experienced delays in ED epinephrine administration. Adult and pediatric patients with skin-related chief concerns were more likely to be to be assigned lower acuity ESI levels. Further studies are needed to identify interventions that will improve ED anaphylaxis triage.

Objective To identify predictors of 30-day emergency department (ED) return visits in patients age 65–79 years and age ≥ 80 years. Methods This was a cohort study of older adults who presented to the ED over a 1-year period. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to identify predictors for returning to the ED within 30 days. We stratified the cohort into those aged 65–79 years and aged ≥80 years. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. This study adhered to the STROBE reporting guidelines. Results A total of 21,460 ED visits representing 14,528 unique patients were included. The overall return rate was 15% (1998/13,300 visits) for age 65–79 years, and 16% (1306/8160 visits) for age ≥ 80 years. A history of congestive heart failure (CHF), dementia, or prior hospitalization within 2 years were associated with increased odds of returning in both age groups (for age 65–79: CHF aOR 1.36 [CI 1.16–1.59], dementia aOR 1.27 [CI 1.07–1.49], prior hospitalization aOR 1.36 [CI 1.19–1.56]; for age ≥ 80: CHF aOR 1.32 [CI 1.13–1.55], dementia aOR 1.22 [CI 1.04–1.42], and prior hospitalization aOR 1.27 [CI 1.09–1.47]). Being admitted from the ED was associated with decreased odds of returning to the ED within 30 days (aOR 0.72 [CI 0.64–0.80] for age 65–79 years and 0.72 [CI 0.63–0.82] for age ≥ 80). Conclusion Age alone was not an independent predictor of return visits. Prior hospitalization, dementia and CHF were predictors of 30-day ED return. The identification of predictors of return visits may help to optimize care transition in the ED.

Objective To compare resource utilization and mortality between older and younger adult patients with similar ED chief complaints and ESI triage levels. Methods This was an observational study of consecutive adult patients (age ≥ 40) who presented to an academic ED over a 1-year period with chest pain, abdominal pain, altered mental status, generalized weakness, or headache. Patients were categorized into 40–64, 65–79, and ≥ 80-year old groups. Mortality and utilization outcomes were compared between age groups through logistic regression models or Cox proportional hazards adjusting for ESI level and chief complaint. Odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results A total of 9798 ED visits were included. As compared to younger adults (age 40–64), older adults, independently of ESI level and chief complaint, had higher ED laboratory use (OR 1.46 [CI 1.29, 1.66] for age 65–80; OR 1.33 [CI 1.15, 1.55] for age ≥ 80), ED radiology use (OR 1.40 [CI 1.26, 1.56]; OR 1.48 [CI 1.30, 1.69]), hospital admission (OR 1.56 [CI 1.42, 1.72]; OR 1.97 [CI 1.75, 2.21]), and ICU admission (OR 1.38 [CI 1.15, 1.65]; OR 1.23 [CI 0.99, 1.52]). Despite similar ESI and chief complaint, patients age 65–79 and ≥ 80 had higher 30-day mortality rates (HR 1.87 [CI 1.39 to 2.51] and 2.47 [CI 1.81 to 3.37], respectively). Conclusions Older adults with similar chief complaints and ESI levels than younger adults, have significantly higher ED resource use, hospitalization rates, and mortality.

A short course of corticosteroids is among the management strategies considered by specialists for the treatment of vestibular neuritis (VN). We conducted an umbrella review (systematic review of systematic reviews) to summarize the evidence of corticosteroids use for the treatment of VN.We included systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the effects of corticosteroids compared to placebo or usual care in adult patients with acute VN. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate. The quality of reviews was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment was used to rate certainty of evidence. No meta-analysis was performed.From 149 titles, five systematic reviews were selected for quality assessment, and two reviews were of higher methodological quality and were included. These two reviews included 12 individual studies and 660 patients with VN. In a meta-analysis of two RCTs including a total of 50 patients, the use of corticosteroids (compared to placebo) was associated with higher complete caloric recovery (risk ratio 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32 to 6.00, low certainty). It is very uncertain whether this translates into clinical improvement as shown by the imprecise effect estimates for outcomes such as patient-reported vertigo or patient-reported dizziness disability. There was a wide CI for the outcome of dizziness handicap score (one study, 30 patients, 20.9 points in corticosteroids group vs. 15.8 points in placebo, mean difference +5.1, 95% CI -8.09 to +18.29, very low certainty). Higher rates of minor adverse effects for those receiving corticosteroids were reported, but the certainty in this evidence was very low.There is limited evidence to support the use of corticosteroids for the treatment of VN in the emergency department.

Objective Determine if a comfort cart would improve older adults' comfort and facilitate communication during Emergency Department (ED) visits. Methods A comfort cart containing low-cost, non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient comfort and ability to communicate (e.g., hearing amplifiers, reading glasses) were made available to patients aged ≥65 years. Patients and clinicians were surveyed to assess effectiveness. We followed the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence: SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines. Results Three hundred patients and 100 providers were surveyed. Among patients, 98.0%, 95.1%, and 67.5% somewhat or strongly agreed that the comfort cart improved comfort, overall experience, and independence, respectively. Among providers, 97.0%, 95.0%, 87.0%, and 83% somewhat or strongly agreed that the comfort cart provided comfort, improved patient satisfaction, increased ability to give compassionate care, and increased patient orientation. Conclusion The comfort cart was an affordable and effective intervention that improved patients' comfort by facilitating communication, wellbeing, and compassionate care delivery.

Background Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the second most common infection requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission in emergency department (ED) patients. Optimal empiric management for health care-associated (HCA) UTI is unclear, particularly in the critically ill. Objective To compare clinical failure of broad vs. narrow antibiotic selection in the ED for patients presenting with HCA UTI admitted to the ICU. Methods Observational cohort of patients started on empiric antibiotic for UTI with at least one HCA risk factor (recurrent UTI, chronic urinary catheter or dialysis, urologic procedures, previous antibiotic exposure, hospitalization, or group facility residence). Broad antibiotics covered Pseudomonas spp. and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase. Clinical failure was a composite of multiorgan dysfunction (MODS) by day 2 and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), readmission, recurrent infection, development of multidrug-resistant organisms, and Clostridium difficile infection. Associations were reported with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results There were 272 patients included; 196 (72.1%) received broad and 76 (27.9%) received narrow therapy. There was no association between antibiotic selection and clinical failure (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.5–2.25, p = 0.89) or between antibiotic selection and number of HCA risk factors (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.73–1.31, p = 0.87). There was an association between clinical failure and MODS on ICU admission (OR 9.14, 95% CI 4.70–17.78, p Conclusion Initial empiric broad or narrow antibiotic coverage in HCA UTI patients who presented to the ED and required ICU admission had similar clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care interventions in the ED capture high-risk patients at a time of crisis and can dramatically improve patient-centered outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To understand the facilitators that contributed to the success of the Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) quality improvement pilot intervention. DESIGN: Effectiveness was evaluated through semi-structured interviews. Reach outcomes were measured by percent of all full-time emergency providers (physicians, physician assistants, nurses) who completed the intervention education components and baseline survey assessing attitudes and knowledge on end-of-life care. PARTICIPANTS: Emergency medicine providers affiliated with two medical centers (N = 197). Interviews conducted with six key informants at both institutions. APPROACH: Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive approaches. Descriptive statistics include reach outcomes and baseline survey results. KEY RESULTS: Both sites successfully implemented all components of the intervention and achieved a high level (> 75%) of intervention reach. Two themes emerged as facilitators to successful effectiveness facilitators of PRIM-ER: (1) institutional leadership support and (2) leveraging established quality improvement (QI) processes. Institutional support included leveraging leadership with authority to (a) mandate trainings; (b) substitute PRIM-ER education for normally scheduled education; and (c) provide protected time to implement intervention components. Effectiveness was also enhanced by capitalizing on existing QI processes which included (a) leveraging interdisciplinary partnerships and communication plans and (b) monitoring performance improvement data. CONCLUSIONS: Capitalizing on strong institutional leadership support and established QI processes enhanced the reach and effectiveness of the PRIM-ER pilot. These findings will guide the PRIM-ER researchers in scaling up the intervention in the remaining 33 sites, as well as enhance the planning of other complex quality improvement interventions in clinical settings. REGISTRATION DETAILS: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109; Grant Number: AT009844-01 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-020-06302-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To assess the impact on patient experience scores of giving an ice pop (Popsicle, Good Humor-Breyers, Oakland, CA) to patients in a pediatric emergency department (ED). Patients and Methods A prospective two-center trial was conducted at a tertiary academic pediatric ED and a community ED from January 1, 2018, through March 31, 2018. The intervention arm gave an ice pop to all eligible patients 0 to 14 years of age on even-numbered days versus conventional practice on odd-numbered days. Press Ganey top box scores were then compared. Results Of 4574 pediatric (0 to 14 years of age) patient visits, patient experience surveys were delivered to 1346 families (29.4%) and 152 were returned (11.3%). Eighty-four surveys were returned for even-numbered day visits and 68 for odd-numbered day visits. There was a significant increase in patient experience scores associated with ice pop administration days for questions that asked about doctor’s concern for comfort 70.2% versus 57.4% (P=.05), doctor’s courtesy 76.2% versus 61.8% (P=.04), and doctor taking time to listen 72.6% versus 57.4% (P=.03). Conclusion A low-cost intervention resulted in significantly increased patient experience scores in select domains. Popsicle administration was a simple intervention which was easily instituted in both academic and community ED settings. Further study should explore the durability of the effect.

Background Droperidol is a dopamine receptor antagonist that functions as an analgesic, sedative, and antiemetic. In 2001, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration required a black box warning in response to case reports of QT prolongation and potential fatal arrhythmias. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of droperidol in patients presenting to a United States Emergency Department (ED). Methods Observational cohort study of all droperidol administrations from 1/1/2012 through 4/19/2018 at an academic ED. The primary endpoint was mortality within 24 h of droperidol administration. Secondary endpoint included use of rescue analgesics. Results A total of 6,881 visits by 5,784 patients received droperidol of whom 6,353 visits authorized use of their records for research, including 5.4% administrations in children and 8.2% in older adults (≥65). Droperidol was used as an analgesic for pain (N = 1,387, 21.8%) and headache (N = 3,622, 57.0%), as a sedative (N = 550, 8.7%), and as an antiemetic (N = 794, 12.5%). No deaths secondary to droperidol administration were recorded within 24 h. Need for rescue analgesia occurred in 5.2% of patients with headache (N = 188) and 7.4% of patients with pain (N = 102); 1.1% of patients with headache received rescue opioids (N = 38) after droperidol, as did 5.4% of patients with pain other than headache (N = 75). No patients had fatal arrhythmias. Akathisia occurred in 2.9%. Conclusion No fatalities were seen among this large cohort of patients who received droperidol in the ED. Our findings suggest droperidol's effectiveness and safety when used as an analgesic, antiemetic and/or sedative.

The Elderly Risk Assessment (ERA) score is a validated index for primary care patients that predict hospitalizations, mortality, and Emergency Department (ED) visits. The score incorporates age, prior hospital days, marital status, and comorbidities. Our aim was to validate the ERA score in ED patients.Observational cohort study of patients age ≥ 60 presenting to an academic ED over a 1-year period. Regression analyses were performed for associations with outcomes (hospitalization, return visits and death). Medians, interquartile range (IQR), odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.The cohort included 27,397 visits among 18,607 patients. Median age 74 years (66-82), 48% were female and 59% were married. Patients from 54% of visits were admitted to the hospital, 16% returned to the ED within 30 days, and 18% died within one year. Higher ERA scores were associated with: hospital admission (score 10 [4-16] vs 5 [1-11], p 0.0001), return visits (11 [5-17] vs 7 [2-13], p 0.0001); and death within one year (14 [7-20] vs 6 [2-13], p 0.0001). Patients with ERA score ≥ 16 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, OR 2.14 (2.02-2.28, p 0.0001), return within 30 days OR 1.99 (1.85-2.14), and to die within a year, OR 2.69 (2.54-2.85).The ERA score can be automatically calculated within the electronic health record and helps identify patients at increased risk of death, hospitalization and return ED visits. The ERA score can be applied to ED patients, and may help prognosticate the need for advanced care planning.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We sought to determine emergency medicine physicians' accuracy in designating patients' disposition status as "inpatient" or "observation" at the time of hospital admission in the context of Medicare's Two-Midnight rule and to identify characteristics that may improve the providers' predictions. We conducted a 90-day observational study of emergency department (ED) admissions involving adults aged 65 years and older and assessed the accuracy of physicians' disposition decisions. Logistic regression models were fit to explore associations and predictors of disposition. A total of 2,257 patients 65 and older were admitted through the ED. The overall error rate in physician designation of observation or inpatient was 36%. Diagnoses most strongly associated with stays lasting less than two midnights included diverticulitis, syncope, and nonspecific chest pain. Diagnoses most strongly associated with stays lasting two or more midnights included orthopedic fractures, biliary tract disease, and back pain. ED physicians inaccurately predicted patient length of stay in more than one third of all patients. Under the Two-Midnight rule, these inaccurate predictions place hospitals at risk of underpayment and patients at risk of significant financial liability. Further work is needed to increase providers' awareness of the financial repercussions of their admission designations and to identify interventions that can improve prediction accuracy.

This second Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-2) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic "low-risk, recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department." The multidisciplinary guideline panel applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding four priority questions for adult emergency department patients with low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain. The intended population includes adults with multiple similar presentations of abdominal signs and symptoms recurring over a period of months or years. The panel reached the following recommendations: (1) if a prior negative computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) has been performed within 12 months, there is insufficient evidence to accurately identify populations in whom repeat CTAP imaging can be safely avoided or routinely recommended; (2) if CTAP with IV contrast is negative, we suggest against ultrasound unless there is concern for pelvic or biliary pathology; (3) we suggest that screening for depression and/or anxiety may be performed during the ED evaluation; and (4) we suggest an opioid-minimizing strategy for pain control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The GRACE-2 writing group developed clinically relevant questions to address the care of adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, previously undifferentiated abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED). Four patient-intervention-comparison-outcome-time (PICOT) questions were developed by consensus of the writing group, who performed a systematic review of the literature and then synthesized direct and indirect evidence to formulate recommendations, following GRADE methodology. The writing group found that despite the commonality and relevance of these questions in emergency care, the quantity and quality of evidence were very limited, and even fundamental definitions of the population and outcomes of interest are lacking. Future research opportunities include developing precise and clinically relevant definitions of low-risk, recurrent, undifferentiated abdominal pain and determining the scope of the existing populations in terms of annual national ED visits for this complaint, costs of care, and patient and provider preferences.

Computed tomography (CT) imaging is frequently obtained for recurrent abdominal pain after a prior emergency department (ED) evaluation. We evaluate the utility of repeat CT imaging following an indeterminate index CT in low-risk abdominal pain adult ED patients.An electronic search was designed for the patient-intervention-control-outcome-timing (PICOT) question: (P) adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, and previously undifferentiated atraumatic abdominal pain presenting to the ED after an index-negative CT within 12 months; (I) repeat CT versus (C) no repeat CT; for (O) abdominal surgery or other invasive procedure, mortality, identification of potentially life-threatening diagnosis, and hospital and intensive care unit admission rates; and return ED visit (T), all within 30 days. Four reviewers independently selected evidence for inclusion and then synthesized the results around the most prevalent themes of repeat CT timing, diagnostic yield, ionizing radiation exposure, and predictors of repetitive imaging.Although 637 articles and abstracts were identified, no direct evidence was found. Thirteen documents were synthesized as indirect evidence. None of the indirect evidence defined a low-risk subset of abdominal pain nor did investigators describe whether reimaging occurred for complaints similar to the initial ED evaluation. Included studies did not describe the index CT findings and some reported explanatory findings noted on the original CT for which repeat CTs might have been indicated. The time frame for a repeat CT ranged from hours to 1 year. The frequency of repeat CTs (2%-47%) varied across studies as did the yield of imaging to alter downstream clinical decision making (range = 5%-67%).Due to the absence of direct evidence our scoping review is unable to provide high-quality evidence-based recommendations upon which to confidently base an imaging practice guideline. There is no evidence to support or refute performing a CT for low-risk recurrent abdominal pain.

Background Recurrent abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED) might represent an opportunity for screening of depression and/or anxiety. Methods We systematically searched five databases for studies evaluating the effect of screening for depression and/or anxiety in ED patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain. Given paucity of direct evidence, we also searched for indirect evidence including studies that assessed prevalence of depression and/or anxiety in EDs (not necessarily recurrent abdominal pain), diagnostic accuracy of screening tools, effectiveness of screening in other settings, and outcomes such as repeat ED visits of patients with abdominal pain who were screened in the ED. Two methodologists evaluated certainty in the evidence using the GRADE approach. Results A total of 4,337 citations were reviewed, and zero studies were found on the effect of screening in patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain in the ED. A total of 35 studies were included as relevant indirect evidence. In studies of ED patients with abdominal pain, depression ranged from 10% to 29%, while anxiety ranged from 18% to 50%. False positives appear to be an issue given relatively low specificity of screening tools. One randomized trial including ED patients with vague symptoms evaluated the effect of depression screening on a composite outcome of depression recognition, psychiatric consultation, or referral by the emergency physician (risk ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49 to 4.53, very low certainty). One study reported that patients with undifferentiated abdominal pain who screened positive for depression have had increased ED recidivism (odds ratio = 3.17, 95% CI = 1.14 to 8.85, very low certainty). Conclusions We were unable to identify any evidence that confirms that depression or anxiety screening in ED patients with recurrent and undifferentiated abdominal pain improves outcomes or changes management downstream.

Key Points Question What factors contribute to cost conversations about anticoagulation treatment between patients with atrial fibrillation and their clinicians, and what outcomes are associated with these conversations? Findings In this cohort study of 830 audiovisual recordings of encounters and participant surveys from a randomized trial comparing atrial fibrillation care with and without a shared decision-making (SDM) tool, cost conversations were associated with the use of an SDM tool, with middle-income patients, and with consultations conducted by female primary care staff clinicians. Cost conversations were associated with patients’ decision-making processes but not final treatment choice. Meaning These findings suggest that SDM tools may inform efforts to promote cost conversations in practice, an important consideration when increasing costs of care are being passed on to patients., This cohort study, a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, assesses factors contributing to cost conversations about care plans between clinicians and patients with atrial fibrillation., Importance How patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and their clinicians consider cost in forming care plans remains unknown. Objective To identify factors that inform conversations regarding costs of anticoagulants for treatment of AF between patients and clinicians and outcomes associated with these conversations. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study of recorded encounters and participant surveys at 5 US medical centers (including academic, community, and safety-net centers) from the SDM4AFib randomized trial compared standard AF care with and without use of a shared decision-making (SDM) tool. Included patients were considering anticoagulation treatment and were recruited by their clinicians between January 30, 2017, and June 27, 2019. Data were analyzed between August and November 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures The incidence of and factors associated with cost conversations, and the association of cost conversations with patients’ consideration of treatment cost burden and their choice of anticoagulation. Results A total of 830 encounters (out of 922 enrolled participants) were recorded. Patients’ mean (SD) age was 71.0 (10.4) years; 511 patients (61.6%) were men, 704 (86.0%) were White, 303 (40.9%) earned between $40 000 and $99 999 in annual income, and 657 (79.2%) were receiving anticoagulants. Clinicians’ mean (SD) age was 44.8 (13.2) years; 75 clinicians (53.2%) were men, and 111 (76%) practiced as physicians, with approximately half (69 [48.9%]) specializing in either internal medicine or cardiology. Cost conversations occurred in 639 encounters (77.0%) and were more likely in the SDM arm (378 [90%] vs 261 [64%]; OR, 9.69; 95% CI, 5.77-16.29). In multivariable analysis, cost conversations were more likely to occur with female clinicians (66 [47%]; OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.21-6.71); consultants vs in-training clinicians (113 [75%]; OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-11.1); clinicians practicing family medicine (24 [16%]; OR, 12.12; 95% CI, 2.75-53.38]), internal medicine (35 [23%]; OR, 3.82; 95% CI, 1.25-11.70), or other clinicians (21 [14%]; OR, 4.90; 95% CI, 1.32-18.16) when compared with cardiologists; and for patients with an annual household income between $40 000 and $99 999 (249 [82.2%]; OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.05-3.29) compared with income below $40 000 or above $99 999. More patients who had cost conversations reported cost as a factor in their decision (244 [89.1%] vs 327 [69.0%]; OR 3.66; 95% CI, 2.43-5.50), but cost conversations were not associated with the choice of anticoagulation agent. Conclusions and Relevance Cost conversations were common, particularly for middle-income patients and with female and consultant-level primary care clinicians, as well as in encounters using an SDM tool; they were associated with patients’ consideration of treatment cost burden but not final treatment choice. With increasing costs of care passed on to patients, these findings can inform efforts to promote cost conversations in practice. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02905032

OBJECTIVES: Individual-level social needs have been shown to substantially impact emergency department (ED) care transitions of older adults. The Geriatric Emergency care Applied Research (GEAR) Network aimed to identify care transition interventions, particularly addressing social needs, and prioritize future research questions. METHODS: GEAR engaged 49 interdisciplinary stakeholders, derived clinical questions, and conducted searches of electronic databases to identify ED discharge care transition interventions in older adult populations. Informed by the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients’ Assets, Risks, and Experiences (PRAPARE) framework, data extraction and synthesis of included studies included the degree that intervention components addressed social needs and their association with patient outcomes. GEAR convened a consensus conference to identify topics of highest priority for future care transitions research. RESULTS: Our search identified 248 unique articles addressing care transition interventions in older adult populations. Of these, 17 individual care transition intervention studies were included in the current literature synthesis. Overall, common care transition interventions included coordination efforts, comprehensive geriatric assessments, discharge planning, and telephone or in-person follow-up. Fourteen of the 17 care transition intervention studies in older adults specifically addressed at least one social need within the PRAPARE framework, most commonly related to access to food, medicine, or health care. No care transition intervention addressing social needs in older adult populations consistently reduced subsequent health care utilization or other patient-centered outcomes. GEAR stakeholders identified that determining optimal outcome measures for ED–home transition interventions was the highest priority area for future care transitions research. CONCLUSIONS: ED care transition intervention studies in older adults frequently address at least one social need component and exhibit variation in the degree of success on a wide array of health care utilization outcomes.

Background: Identification of systolic heart failure among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute dyspnea is challenging. The reasons for dyspnea are often multifactorial. A focused physical evaluation and diagnostic testing can lack sensitivity and specificity. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of an artificial intelligence-enabled ECG to identify patients presenting with dyspnea who have left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Methods: We retrospectively applied a validated artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm for the identification of LVSD (defined as LV ejection fraction ≤35%) to a cohort of patients aged ≥18 years who were evaluated in the ED at a Mayo Clinic site with dyspnea. Patients were included if they had at least one standard 12-lead ECG acquired on the date of the ED visit and an echocardiogram performed within 30 days of presentation. Patients with prior LVSD were excluded. We assessed the model performance using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Results: A total of 1606 patients were included. Median time from ECG to echocardiogram was 1 day (Q1: 1, Q3: 2). The artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm identified LVSD with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86–0.91) and accuracy of 85.9%. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were 74%, 87%, 97%, and 40%, respectively. To identify an ejection fraction 800 identified LVSD with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.76–0.84). Conclusions: The ECG is an inexpensive, ubiquitous, painless test which can be quickly obtained in the ED. It effectively identifies LVSD in selected patients presenting to the ED with dyspnea when analyzed with artificial intelligence and outperforms NT-proBNP. Graphic Abstract: A graphic abstract is available for this article.

IntroductionDelirium is commonly missed in older adults presenting to the emergency department (ED). Although current recommendations for active screening of delirium in the ED, this might not be feasible or practical. Identifying patients at high risk for prevalent and incident delirium in the ED will help to improve the screening process and to build interventions. There is currently scattered synthesis of evidence on risk factors associated with delirium in the ED. To address this gap, we are conducting a systematic review to describe the risk factors (patient vulnerability factors and precipitating factors) for delirium in the ED.Methods and analysisA literature search was performed from inception to March 2020 in Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science. We will include original research studies that report a quantitative relationship between at least one risk factor and delirium in the ED setting. Two investigators will use eligibility criteria from this protocol to independently screen titles and abstracts, and select studies based on full-text review of potentially eligible studies. After arriving at a final set of included studies, two investigators will extract data using a standardised data collection form. If appropriate, data regarding each risk factor will be pooled through a random-effect meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationTo our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review evaluating risk factors for prevalent and incident delirium specifically related to the ED setting. Results of this study will aid in the identification of older adults at risk for delirium in the ED. We aim to publish the results of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal with good visibility for the fields of emergency medicine and geriatrics.PROSPERO registration numberCDR42020175261

Study objective To assess the efficacy and safety of intranasal analgesic-dose ketamine as compared to intranasal fentanyl for pediatric acute pain. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases for randomized controlled trials from inception to December 2019. We conducted meta-analysis with random-effects models to evaluate pain reduction, rescue analgesia, adverse events and sedation between intranasal ketamine and intranasal fentanyl. Random-effects models were used to estimate weighted mean differences (WMD) and pooled relative risks (RR). Results A total of 546 studies were screened and 4 trials were included. In the meta-analysis of 4 studies including 276 patients, ketamine had similar reductions in pain scores from baseline to all post-intervention times (10 to 15 min: WMD -1.42, 95% CI -9.95 to 7.10; 30 min: WMD 0.40, 95% CI -6.29 to 7.10; 60 min: WMD -0.64, 95% CI -6.76 to 5.47). Ketamine was associated with similar rates of rescue analgesia (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.25). Ketamine had a higher risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.79), and no patients receiving ketamine had a serious adverse event. There was one serious adverse event (hypotension) with fentanyl that self-resolved. No patients receiving either IN fentanyl or ketamine had significant sedation. Conclusion Intranasal analgesic-dose ketamine may be considered as an alternative to opioids for acute pain management in children. Its accepted use will depend on the tolerability of non-serious adverse events and the desire to avoid opioids.

Key Points Question What factors are associated with a potentially missed diagnosis of appendicitis in the emergency department among adults and children? Findings In this cohort study of 123 711 patients diagnosed with appendicitis, insurance claims data indicated that appendicitis was potentially missed in 6.0% of adults and 4.4% of children during the initial emergency department visit. Factors associated with potentially missed appendicitis included female sex, the coexistence of abdominal pain and constipation, and the presence of comorbidities. Meaning Population-based estimates of the rates of potentially missed appendicitis reveal opportunities for improvement and identify factors that may alert clinicians and mitigate the risk of missed diagnosis., Importance Appendicitis may be missed during initial emergency department (ED) presentation. Objective To compare patients with a potentially missed diagnosis of appendicitis (ie, patients with symptoms associated with appendicitis, including abdominal pain, constipation, nausea and/or vomiting, fever, and diarrhea diagnosed within 1-30 days after initial ED presentation) with patients diagnosed with appendicitis on the same day of ED presentation to identify factors associated with potentially missed appendicitis. Design, Setting, and Participants In this cohort study, a retrospective analysis of commercially insured claims data was conducted from January 1 to December 15, 2019. Patients who presented to the ED with undifferentiated symptoms associated with appendicitis between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were identified using the Clinformatics Data Mart administrative database (Optum Insights). The study sample comprised eligible adults (aged ≥18 years) and children (aged, This cohort study uses insurance claims data to compare patients with a potentially missed diagnosis of appendicitis with those diagnosed with appendicitis during the initial emergency department visit to identify factors associated with potentially missed appendicitis among adults and children.

OBJECTIVES: Neurovascular and neurocritical care emergencies constitute a leading cause of morbidity/mortality. There has been great evolution in this field, including but not limited to extended time‐window therapeutic interventions for acute ischemic stroke. The intent of this article is to evaluate the goals and future direction of clinical rotations in neurovascular and neurocritical care for emergency medicine (EM) residents. METHODS: A panel of 13 board‐certified emergency physicians from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) neurologic emergencies interest group (IG) convened in response to a call for publications—three with fellowship training/board certification in stroke and/or neurocritical care; five with advanced research degrees; three who have been authors on national practice guidelines; and six who have held clinical duties within neurology, neurosurgery, or neurocritical care. A mixed‐methods analysis was performed including a review of the literature, a survey of Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) residency leaders/faculty and SAEM neuro‐IG members, and a consensus review by this panel of select neurology rotations provided by IG faculty. RESULTS: Thirteen articles for residency neurovascular education were identified: three studies on curriculum, three studies evaluating knowledge, and seven studies evaluating knowledge after an educational intervention. Intervention outcomes included the ability to recognize and manage acute strokes, manage intracerebral hemorrhage, calculate National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and interpret images. In the survey sent to CORD residency leaders and neuro‐IG faculty, response was obtained from 48 programs. A total of 52.1% indicated having a required rotation (6.2% general neurology, 2% stroke service, 18.8% neurologic intensive care unit, 2% neurosurgery, 22.9% on a combination of services). The majority of programs with required rotations have a combination rotation (residents rotate through multiple services) and evaluations were positive. CONCLUSIONS: Variability exists in the availability of neurovascular/neurocritical care rotations for EM trainees. Dedicated clinical time in neurologic education was beneficial to participants. Given recent advancements in the field, augmentation of EM residency training in this area merits strong consideration.

Background: Patient satisfaction surveys are vital to measuring a patient’s experience of care. How scores of patients managed by emergency medicine (EM) residents change as residents progress through training is not known. Objectives: To evaluate whether EM residents’ patient satisfaction scores improve as residency training progresses, similar to clinical skill improvement. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study evaluated the correlation of patient satisfaction scores with EM resident year of training from 2015 through 2017. We evaluated for a change in score over time for the 4 “physician questions” and the “overall” score. Results: We evaluated 1684 Press Ganey surveys linked to 40 EM resident physicians during the study period. The mean top box scores for the 4 physician questions (concern for comfort [ P = .72], courtesy [ P = .55], informative about treatment [ P = .46], and listening [ P = .91]) and overall assessment of emergency department care ( P = .51) were not significantly improved over the course of resident. Conclusion: We did not observe a difference in EM residents’ patient experience scores as their level of training progressed. Comprehensive patient experience training for residents might be needed.

BACKGROUND Food is the leading cause of anaphylaxis in children seen in emergency departments in the United States, yet data on emergency department visits and hospitalizations related to food-induced anaphylaxis are limited. The objective of our study was to examine national time trends of pediatric food-induced anaphylaxis-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations. METHODS We conducted an observational study using a national administrative claims database from 2005 through 2014. Participants were younger than 18 years with an emergency department visit or hospitalization for food-induced anaphylaxis. Outcome measures of our study included time trends of pediatric food-induced anaphylaxis-related emergency department visits and hospitalizations, including observations (in an emergency department or a hospital unit), inpatient admissions, and intensive care unit admissions. RESULTS During the study period, participants had 7310 food-induced anaphylaxis-related emergency department visits. Emergency department visits for food-induced anaphylaxis increased by 214% (P

Background The decision to obtain a computed tomography CT scan in the emergency department (ED) is complex, including a consideration of the risk posed by the test itself weighed against the importance of obtaining the result. In patients with limited access to primary care follow up the consequences of not making a diagnosis may be greater than for patients with ready access to primary care, impacting diagnostic reasoning. We set out to determine if there is an association between CT utilization in the ED and patient access to primary care. Methods We performed a cross-sectional study of all ED visits in which a CT scan was obtained between 2003 and 2012 at an academic, tertiary-care center. Data were abstracted from the electronic medical record and administrative databases and included type of CT obtained, demographics, comorbidities, and access to a local primary care provider (PCP). CT utilization rates were determined per 1000 patients. Results A total of 595,895 ED visits, including 98,001 visits in which a CT was obtained (16.4%) were included. Patients with an assigned PCP accounted for 55% of all visits. Overall, CT use per 1000 ED visits increased from 142.0 in 2003 to 169.2 in 2012 (p

Study objective To summarize interventions that impact the experience of older adults in the emergency department (ED) as measured by patient experience instruments. Methods This is a systematic review to evaluate interventions aimed to improve geriatric patient experience in the ED. We searched Ovid CENTRAL, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO from inception to January 2019. The main outcome was patient experience measured through instruments to assess patient experience or satisfaction. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the confidence in the evidence available. Results The search strategy identified 992 studies through comprehensive literature search and hand-search of reference lists. A total of 21 studies and 3163 older adults receiving an intervention strategy aimed at improve patient experience in the ED were included. Department-wide interventions, including geriatric ED and comprehensive geriatric assessment unit, focused care coordination with discharge planning and referral for community services, were associated with improved patient experience. Providing an assistive listening device to those with hearing loss and having a pharmacist reviewing the medication list showed an improved patient perception of quality of care provided. The confidence in the evidence available for the outcome of patient experience was deemed to be very low. Conclusion While all studies reported an outcome of patient experience, there was significant heterogeneity in the tools used to measure it. The very low certainty in the evidence available highlights the need for more reliable tools to measure patient experience and studies designed to measure the effect of the interventions.

Objective To assess the safety of a single dose of parenteral ketorolac for analgesia management in geriatric emergency department (ED) patients. Methods This was a retrospective study of all administrations of parenteral ketorolac to adults ≥65 years of age and matched controls. The primary outcome was the occurrence of any of the following adverse events within 30 days of the ED visit: gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, acute decompensated heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, dialysis, transfusion, and death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of an increase in serum creatinine of ≥1.5 times baseline within 7 and 30 days of the ED visit. Results There were 480 patients included in the final analysis, of which 120 received ketorolac (3: 1 matching). The primary outcome occurred in 14 of 360 patients who did not receive ketorolac and 2 of 120 ketorolac patients (3.9% vs 1.7%, p = 0.38; OR 2.39, 95% CI 0.54–10.66). There was no occurrence of dialysis or death in either group. The secondary outcome occurred in 1 of 13 and 1 of 23 ketorolac patients with both a baseline serum creatinine and a measure within 7 and 30 days, respectively, but did not occur in patients who did not receive ketorolac (7 days: 7.7% vs 0.0%, p = 0.29; 30 days: 4.4% vs 0.0%, p = 0.22). Conclusion The use of single doses of parenteral ketorolac for analgesia management was not associated with an increased incidence of adverse cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, or renal adverse outcomes in a select group of older adults.

Background Goals of care (GOC) conversations in the emergency department (ED) are often a brief discussion of code status rather than a patient-oriented dialogue. We aimed to develop a guide to facilitate conversations between ED clinicians and patients to elicit patient values and establish goals for end-of-life care, while maintaining ED efficiency. Paths of ED Care, a conversation guide, is the product of this work. Design A multidisciplinary/multispecialty group used recommended practices to adapt a GOC conversation guide for ED patients. ED clinicians used the guide and provided feedback on content, design, and usability. Patient-clinician interactions were recorded for discussion analysis, and both were surveyed to inform iterative refinement. A series of discussions with patient representatives, multidisciplinary clinicians, bioethicists, and health care designers yielded feedback. We used a process similar to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and provide comparison to these. Results A conversation guide, eight pages with each page 6 by 6 inches in dimension, uses patient-oriented prompts and includes seven sections: 1) evaluation of patient/family understanding of disease, 2) explanation of possible trajectories, 3) introduction to different pathways of care, 4) explanation of pathways, 5) assessment of understanding and concerns, 6) code status, and 7) personalized summary. Limitations Recruitment of sufficient number of patients/providers to the project was the primary limitation. Methods are limited to qualitative analysis of guide creation and feasibility without quantitative analysis. Conclusions Paths of ED Care is a guide to facilitate patient-centered shared decision making for ED patients, families, and clinicians regarding GOC. This may ensure care concordant with patients’ values and preferences. Use of the guide was well-received and facilitated meaningful conversations between patients and providers.

Objectives Rapid response teams (RRTs) respond to signs of deterioration to avoid morbidity and mortality. Early RRT activation (eRRT) in patients admitted from the emergency department (ED) is associated with significantly increased mortality. Predicting these events may represent an opportunity to identify patients who would benefit from further resuscitation, aid disposition decision-making, or improve communication between ED and inpatient providers. We aimed to create a clinical prediction instrument to quantify the risk of eRRT. Methods We performed an observational cohort study of patients admitted to a non–intensive care unit (ICU) setting who triggered eRRT from January 2009 to December of 2012 compared to those who did not trigger eRRT. Age, sex, ED vital sign measurements, and final ED diagnosis by ICD-9 code were evaluated in a multivariable logistic regression model. The performance of prediction models was assessed using discrimination summarized by area under a receiver operating curve (AUC) and calibration with the Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The final model was used to create a simplified scoring system. Results The eRRT group consisted of 474 patients who were compared to 2,575 patients in the reference group. Age and sex did not add significant discrimination to the model and were eliminated from the simplified, final model. This model, which included vital signs and diagnosis category, was found to have an AUC of 0.754 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.730 to 0.778) and was used to create a simplified scoring system. The odds ratio for the association of a 1-unit increase in risk score with eRRT was 1.37 (95% CI = 1.32 to 1.41; p < 0.001). When internally validated, the score was found to have an AUC of 0.759 (95% CI = 0.735 to 0.753). Calculated scores ranged from −3 to 18, which corresponded to predicted probabilities of eRRT ranging from 5.1% to 72.2%. Conclusions In summary, the PeRRT score is a simple tool that can be referenced by emergency providers at the bedside to quantify the risk of early RRT activation and potential deterioration, helping to answer the question, “How likely is my patient to trigger an RRT activation in the next twelve hours?” Given that patients who trigger eRRT have an elevated risk of morbidity and mortality, higher scores should result in resuscitative intervention, further observation in the ED, consideration of ICU admission, or direct enhanced communication between ED and inpatient providers. A prospective multicenter study is required to further validate this instrument.

Objectives Despite a high prevalence of coronary heart disease in both genders, studies show a gender disparity in evaluation whereby women are less likely than men to undergo timely or comprehensive cardiac investigation. Using videographic analysis, we sought to quantify gender differences in provider recommendations and patient evaluations. Methods We analyzed video recordings from our Chest Pain Choice trial, a single center patient-level randomized trial in which emergency department patients with chest pain being considered for cardiac stress testing were randomized to shared decision-making or usual care. Patient-provider interactions were video recorded. We compared characteristics and outcomes by gender. Results Of the 204 patients enrolled (101 decision aid; 103 usual care), 120 (58.8%) were female. Of the 75 providers evaluated, 20 (26.7%) were female. The mean (SD) pretest probability of acute coronary syndrome was lower in women [3.7% (2.2) vs 6.7% (4.4), P =.0002]. There was no gender effect on duration of discussion, clinician recommendations, OPTION scores, patient perceptions, or eventual patient dispositions. When the clinician and patient gender matched, OPTION scores were lower (interaction P =.002), and patients were less likely to find the information to be very helpful (interaction P =.10). Conclusions Despite a lower pretest probability of acute coronary syndrome in women, we did not observe any significant gender disparity in how patients were managed and evaluated. When the patients' and providers' gender matched, the provider involved them less in the decision making process, and the information provided was less helpful than when the genders did not match.

Providing the correct level of care for patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is crucial, but the level of care needed at initial presentation may not be clear. This study evaluated factors associated with admission to intensive care unit (ICU) level of care. This is an observational study of all adult patients admitted to our institution with non-traumatic supratentorial ICH presenting within 72 h of symptom onset between 2009–2012 (derivation cohort) and 2005–2008 (validation cohort). Factors associated with neuroscience ICU admission were identified via logistic regression analysis, from which a triage model was derived, refined, and retrospectively validated. For the derivation cohort, 229 patients were included, of whom 70 patients (31 %) required ICU care. Predictors of neuroscience ICU admission were: younger age [odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95 % CI 0.91–0.97; p = 0.0004], lower Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score (0.39, 0.28–0.54; p

Introduction: Epinephrine is the treatment of choice for anaphylaxis. We surveyed emergency department (ED) health care providers regarding 2 methods of intramuscular (IM) epinephrine administration (autoinjector and manual injection) for the management of anaphylaxis and allergic reactions and identified provider perceptions and preferred method of medication delivery. Methods: This observational study adhered to survey reporting guidelines. It was performed through a Web-based survey completed by health care providers at an academic ED. The participants consisted of all ED providers, including staff physicians, resident physicians, pharmacists, advanced practice providers, and nurses. The primary outcomes were assessment of provider perceptions and identification of the preferred IM epinephrine administration method by ED health care providers. Results: Of 217 ED health care providers invited to participate, 172 (79%) completed the survey. Overall, 82% of respondents preferred the autoinjector method of epinephrine administration. Providers rated the autoinjector method more favorably with regard to time required for training, ease of use, convenience, satisfaction with weight-based dosing, risk of dosing errors, and speed of administration (P

OBJECTIVES Coronary computerized tomography angiography (CCTA) is a rapidly emerging technology for the evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We assessed trends in CCTA use and compared downstream healthcare utilization between CCTA and cardiac stress testing modalities. METHODS Using administrative claims data (Optum Labs Data Warehouse) from over 100 million geographically diverse privately insured and Medicare Advantage enrollees across the United States, we identified 2,047,799 ED patients from January 2006 to December 2013 who presented with chest pain and had a CCTA or cardiac stress test within 72 hours. Cohorts were established based on CCTA or functional stress testing (myocardial perfusion scintigraphy [MPS], stress echocardiogram [SE], or treadmill exercise electrocardiogram [TMET]) performed within 72 hours of the ED visit. We tracked subsequent invasive cardiac procedures (invasive coronary angiography [ICA], percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], and coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), repeat noninvasive testing, return ED visits, hospitalization, and the rate of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) within 30 days. We used propensity-score matching to adjust for coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index, and baseline differences between patients selected for CCTA or cardiac stress testing. Logistic regression was used to measure adjusted associations between testing modality and outcomes. RESULTS During the study period, CCTA use increased from 0.8% to 4.5% of all cardiac testing within 72 hours, a change of 434% (p-value for trend < 0.001), while rates of other cardiac stress testing modalities decreased (-22% for TMET [p < 0.001]; -11% for SE [p = 0.11]; -6% for MPS [p = 0.04]. After matching, there was no difference in the 30-day rate of AMI between testing modalities. Compared to MPS, CCTA was associated with higher rates of PCI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 1.51), and CABG (OR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.13). Compared to SE and treadmill stress testing, CCTA was associated with more invasive procedures, hospitalizations, return ED visits, and repeat noninvasive testing. CONCLUSIONS CCTA use increased fourfold during the study period and was associated with higher rates of PCI, CABG, repeat noninvasive testing, hospitalization, and return ED visits. The authors have no relevant financial information or potential conflicts to disclose.

IntroductionEmergency Medical Service (EMS) systems are vital in the identification, assessment, and treatment of trauma, stroke, myocardial infarction, and sepsis patients, improving early recognition, resuscitation, and transport. Emergency Medical Service personnel provide similar care for patients with syncope. The role of EMS in the management of patients with syncope has not been reported.Hypothesis/ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to describe the management of out-of-hospital syncope by prehospital providers in an urban EMS system.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of consecutively enrolled patients over 18 years of age, over a two-year period, who presented by EMS with syncope, or near-syncope, to a tertiary care emergency department (ED). Demographics included comorbidities, history, and physical exam findings documented by prehospital providers, as well as the interventions provided. Data were collected from standardized patient care records for descriptive analysis.ResultsOf the 723 patients presenting with syncope to the ED, 284 (39.3%) were transported by EMS. Compared to non-EMS patients, those who arrived by ambulance were older (mean age 65 [SD = 18.5] years versus 61 [SD = 19.2] years; P = .019). There were no statistically significant differences in cardiovascular comorbidities (hypertension, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, stroke, or congestive heart failure) between EMS and non-EMS patients. The most common chief complaints were fainting (50.0%) and dizziness (44.7%). The most common intervention provided was cardiac monitoring (55.6%), followed by administration of normal saline infusion (50.5%), oxygen (41.9%), blood glucose check (41.5%), and electrocardiogram (EKG; 40.5%).ConclusionEmergency Medical Service personnel transport more than one-third of patients presenting to the ED with syncope. Documentation of key elements of the history (witnesses, prodrome, predisposing factors, and post-event symptoms) and physical examination were not recorded consistently.LongBJ, SerranoLA, CabanasJG, BellolioMF. Opportunities for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) care of syncope. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(4):349–352.

OBJECTIVE Patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental delays represent a unique patient population. We described a cohort of children with ASD cared for in an emergency department (ED) setting and the specific health care resources used for their care. METHODS This is an observational study of consecutive children (