Search

Objective: This national postal survey aimed to examine Canadian emergency physicians' practice patterns with respect to drug treatment and perspectives on peripheral nerve blocks., Background: The treatment of primary headache disorders in the emergency department is variable., Methods: We surveyed 500 emergency physicians listed in the Canadian Medical Directory according to a modified Dillman's method: an initial invitation was followed by up to four reminders to nonresponders. Physicians were asked questions regarding their frequency of medication administration and perspectives toward peripheral nerve blocks., Results: Of 500 mailed surveys, 468 were delivered and 179 physicians responded (response rate = 38.2%). The majority of physicians were men (92/144, 63.9%); 80.6% (116/144) had been in practice for greater than or equal to 10 years with 50.7% (75/148) in a community or district general teaching hospital. Commonly used pharmacotherapies for primary headaches were intravenous dopamine receptor antagonists (69%), co-administration of ketorolac and a dopamine receptor antagonist (54.2%), intravenous fluid boluses (54%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) alone (53.5%), and acetaminophen (51.4%). Only 80 of 144 physicians (55.6%) reported previous experience with peripheral nerve blocks (95% confidence interval [CI] = 48%-65%). The majority (68/80, 85.0%) agreed peripheral nerve blocks are safe and 55.1% (43/78) agreed they are effective. The vast majority (118/140, 84.3%) would consider peripheral nerve blocks as a first-line treatment option given sufficient evidence from a future trial (95% CI = 78%-90%)., Conclusion: NSAIDs alone, as well as dopamine receptor antagonists with or without ketorolac are commonly used for primary headache in Canadian emergency departments. A large proportion of physicians have never used a peripheral nerve block in their practice; among those who have experience with peripheral nerve blocks, the majority find them safe and effective. The majority of respondents would consider peripheral nerve blocks as a first-line treatment option given sufficient evidence from a future trial., (© 2022 American Headache Society.)

Purpose: There is a worldwide shortage of organs for transplantation. One method to increase the number of organs available for transplant is to increase the number of registered organ donors. The emergency department (ED) may be a suitable venue to disseminate knowledge to patients about organ donation, and to offer an immediate or future opportunity to register as an organ donor. This study aimed to assess emergency physicians' attitudes and acceptability of an ED-based organ donation registration initiative., Methods: We developed and distributed a national postal survey using a modified Dillman's tailored design technique to a random sample of emergency physicians selected from the Canadian Medical Directory., Results: From a total of 474 delivered surveys, we received 228 responses (48.1%). 98.5% of emergency physicians support the concept of deceased organ donation. 85.1% felt that the emergency department is an appropriate setting to disseminate information regarding organ donation and 77.6% felt that it is an appropriate location to offer an immediate opportunity to register as an organ donor. 74.1% of physicians who responded report to be personally registered as an organ donor., Conclusion: Most emergency physicians are supportive of organ donation promotion in the ED, including offering an immediate opportunity to register., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP)/ Association Canadienne de Médecine d'Urgence (ACMU).)

Background: Transient ischemic attack (TIA) and non-disabling stroke are common emergency department (ED) presentations. Currently, there are no prospective multicenter studies determining predictors of neurologists confirming a diagnosis of cerebral ischemia in patients discharged with a diagnosis of TIA or stroke. The objectives were to (1) calculate the concordance between emergency physicians and neurologists for the outcome of diagnosing TIA or stroke, and (2) identify characteristics associated with neurologists diagnosing a stroke mimic., Methods: This was a planned sub-study of a prospective cohort study at 14 Canadian EDs enrolling patients diagnosed with TIA or non-disabling stroke from 2006 to 2017. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with neurologists' diagnosis of cerebral ischemia. Our primary outcome was the composite outcome of cerebral ischemia (TIA or non-disabling stroke) based on the neurologists' assessment., Results: The diagnosis of cerebral ischemia was confirmed by neurologists in 5794 patients (55.4%). The most common identified stroke mimics were migraine (18%), peripheral vertigo (7%), syncope (4%), and seizure (3%). Over a third of patients (38.4%) ultimately had an undetermined aetiology for their symptoms. The strongest predictors of cerebral ischemia confirmation were infarct on CT (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.65-2.02), advanced age (OR comparing 75th-25th percentiles 1.67, 1.55-1.80), language disturbance (OR 1.92, 1.75-2.10), and smoking (OR 1.67, 1.46-1.91). The strongest predictors of stroke mimics were syncope (OR 0.59, 0.48-0.72), vertigo (OR 0.52, 0.45-0.59), bilateral symptoms (OR 0.60, 0.50-0.72), and confusion (OR 0.50, 0.44-0.57)., Conclusion: Physicians should have a high index of suspicion of cerebral ischemia in patients with advanced age, smoking history, language disturbance, or infarcts on CT. Physicians should discriminate in which patients to pursue stroke investigations on when deemed at minimal risk of cerebral ischemia, including those with isolated vertigo, syncope, or bilateral symptoms., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP)/ Association Canadienne de Médecine d'Urgence (ACMU).)

Objectives: Response rates to physician surveys are typically low. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a prenotification letter on the response rate of a postal survey of emergency physicians., Design: This was a substudy of a national, cross-sectional postal survey sent to emergency physicians in Canada. We randomised participants to either receive a postal prenotification letter prior to the survey, or to no prenotification letter., Participants: A random sample of 500 emergency physicians in Canada. Participants were selected from the Canadian Medical Directory, a national medical directory which lists more than 99% of practising physicians in Canada., Interventions: Using computer-generated randomisation, physicians were randomised in a concealed fashion to receive a prenotification letter approximately 1 week prior to the survey, or to not receive a prenotification letter. All physicians received an unconditional incentive of a $3 coffee card with the survey instrument. In both groups, non-respondents were sent reminder surveys approximately every 14 days and a special contact using Xpresspost during the final contact attempt., Outcome: The primary outcome was the survey response rate., Results: 201 of 447 eligible physicians returned the survey (45.0%). Of 231 eligible physicians contacted in the prenotification group, 80 (34.6%) returned the survey and among 237 eligible physicians contacted in the no-prenotification group, 121 (51.1%) returned the survey (absolute difference in proportions 16.5%, 95% CI 2.5 to 30.5, p=0.01)., Conclusion: Inclusion of a prenotification letter resulted in a lower response rate in this postal survey of emergency physicians. Given the added costs, time and effort required to send a prenotification letter, this study suggests that it may be more effective to omit the prenotification letter in physician postal surveys., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MH receives a salary as Hospital Donation Physician from Trillium Gift of Life Network, Ontario’s organ donation organisation and JJP is supported by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario through a Mid-Career Award., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Cricothyrotomy is an intervention performed to salvage "can't intubate, can't ventilate" situations. Studies have shown poor accuracy with landmarking the cricothyroid membrane, particularly in female patients by surgeons and anesthesiologists. This study examines the perceived versus actual success rate of landmarking the cricothyroid membrane by resident and staff emergency physicians using obese and non-obese models., Methods: Five male and female volunteers were models. Each model was placed supine, and a point-of-care ultrasound expert landmarked the borders of each cricothyroid membrane; 20 residents and 15 staff emergency physicians were given one attempt to landmark five models. Overall accuracy and accuracy stratified by sex and obesity status were calculated., Results: Overall landmarking accuracy amongst all participants was 58% (SD 18%). A difference in accuracy was found for obese males (88%) versus obese females (40%) (difference = 48%, 95% CI = 30-65%, p < 0.0001), and non-obese males (77%) versus non-obese females (46%) (difference = 31%, 95% CI = 12-51%, p = 0.004). There was no association between perceived difficulty and success (correlation = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.081-0.214, p = 0.37). Confidence levels overall were higher amongst staff physicians (3.0) than residents (2.7) (difference = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.1-0.6, p = 0.02), but there was no correlation between confidence in an attempt and its success (p = 0.33)., Conclusion: We found that physicians demonstrate significantly lower accuracy when landmarking cricothyroid membranes of females. Emergency physicians were unable to predict their own accuracy while landmarking, which can potentially lead to increased failed attempts and a longer time to secure the airway. Improved training techniques may reduce failed attempts and improve the time to secure the airway.

Objectives: One in four cases of acute aortic syndrome are missed. This national survey examined Canadian Emergency physicians' opinion on risk stratification, the need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify patients, and the required sensitivity of such a tool., Methods: We surveyed 1,556 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. We used a modified Dillman technique with a prenotification email and up to three survey attempts using electronic mail. Physicians were asked 21 questions about demographics, importance of certain high-risk features, investigation options, threshold for investigation, and if a clinical decision tool is required., Results: We had a response rate of 32%. Respondents were 66% male, and 49% practicing >10 years, with 59% in an academic teaching hospital. A total of 93% reported a need for a clinical decision aid to risk stratify for acute aortic syndrome. A total of 99.6% of physicians were pragmatic accepting a non-zero miss-rate, two-thirds accepting <1%, and the remaining accepting a higher miss-rate., Conclusions: Our national survey determined that emergency physicians would use a highly sensitive clinical decision aid to determine which patients are at low, medium, or high-risk for acute aortic syndrome. The majority of clinicians have a low threshold (<1%) for investigating for acute aortic syndrome, but accept that a zero miss-rate is not feasible.

Background and Aims: Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) from a brain aneurysm, if untreated in the acute phase, leads to loss of functional independence in about 30% of patients and death in 27-44%. To evaluate for SAH, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Clinical Policy recommends obtaining a non-contrast brain computed tomography (CT) scan followed by a lumbar puncture (LP) if the CT is negative. On the other hand, current evidence from prospectively collected data suggests that CT alone may be sufficient to rule out SAH in patients who present within 6 h of symptom onset while anecdotal evidence suggests that CT angiogram (CTA) may be used to detect aneurysms, which are the probable cause of SAH. Since many different options are available to emergency physicians, we examined their practice pattern variation by observing their diagnostic approaches and their adherence to the ACEP Clinical Policy., Methods: We developed, validated, and distributed a survey to emergency physicians at three practice sites: (1) Stanford Healthcare, California, (2) Intermountain Healthcare (five emergency departments), Utah, and (3) Ottawa General Hospital, Toronto. The survey questions examined physician knowledge on CT and LP's test performance and used case-based scenarios to assess diagnostic approaches, variation in practice, and adherence to guidelines. Results were presented as proportions with 95% CIs., Results: Of the 216 physicians surveyed, we received 168 responses (77.8%). The responses by site were: (1) (n = 38, 23.2%), (2) (n = 70, 42.7%), (3) (n = 56, 34.1%). To the CT and LP test performance question, most physicians indicated that CT alone detects > 90% of SAH in those with a confirmed SAH [n = 150 (89.3%, 95% CI 83.6-93.5]. To the case-based questions, most physicians indicated that they would perform a CTA along with a CT [n = 110 (65.5%, 95% CI 57.8-72.6)], some indicated a LP along with a CT [n = 57, 33.9% 95% CI 26.8-41.6)], and a few indicated both a CTA and a LP [n = 16, 9.5%, 95% CI 5.5-15.0]. We also observed practice site variation in the proportion of physicians who indicated that they would use CTA: (1) (n = 25, 65.8%), (2) (n = 54, 77.1%), and (3) (n = 28, 50.0%) (p = 0.006)., Conclusions: Survey responses indicate that physicians use some or all of the imaging tests, with or without LP to diagnose SAH. We observed variation in the use of CTA by site and academic setting and divergence from ACEP Clinical Policy.

Objectives: Physician variation in the use of computed tomography (CT) is concerning due to the risks of ionizing radiation, cost, and downstream effects of unnecessary testing. The objectives of this study were to describe variation in CT-ordering rates among emergency physicians (EPs), to measure correlation between perceived and actual CT-ordering rates, to assess attitudes that influence decisions to order imaging tests, and to identify EP attitudes associated with higher CT utilization., Methods: This study was a retrospective review of imaging and administrative billing records at two emergency department sites of a tertiary care adult teaching hospital. The study also included a cross-sectional survey of EPs at this hospital. We asked physicians about their perceived ordering behaviour, and what factors influenced their decision to order a CT. We examined correlations between perceived and actual CT-ordering rates. We adjusted ordering rates for shift distribution using a logistic regression model and identified outlier physicians whose ordering rate was significantly lower or higher than expected. We used multivariable regression analysis to determine which survey responses predicted higher CT utilization., Results: During the study period, 59 EPs saw 45,854 patients, and ordered 6,609 CTs - a mean ordering rate of 14.4% (standard deviation (SD)=4.3%). The ordering rate for individual physicians ranged from 5.9% to 25.9%. Of the 59 EPs, 13 EPs were low-ordering outliers; 12 were high-ordering outliers. Forty-five EPs (76.3%) completed the survey. Mean perceived ordering rate was 12.6%, and was weakly correlated with actual ordering (r=0.19, p=0.21). 42 EPs (93.3%) believed they ordered "about the same" or "fewer" CTs than their peers. Of the 17 EPs in the two highest ordering quintiles, only 3 (18%) knew they were high orderers. In the multivariable analysis, higher ordering was associated with increasing strength of response to the following predictors: medico-legal risk (relative risk [RR]=1.18, 95% CI: 1.03-1.21), risk of contrast (RR=1.14, 95% CI: 1.07-1.22), what colleagues would do (RR=1.09, 95% CI: 0.99-1.19), risk of missing a diagnosis (RR=1.08, 95% CI: 0.98-1.21), and patient wishes (RR=1.07, 95% CI: 0.97-1.17)., Conclusions: There is large variation in CT ordering among EPs. Physicians' self-reported ordering rate correlates poorly with actual ordering. High CT orderers were rarely aware that they ordered more than their colleagues. Higher rates of ordering were observed among physicians who reported increased concern with 1) risk of missing a diagnosis, 2) medico-legal risk, 3) risk of contrast, 4) patient wishes, and 5) what colleagues would do.

Objectives: Rates of opioid-related deaths have reached the level of national public health crisis in Canada. Community-based opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs distribute naloxone to people at risk, and the emergency department (ED) may be an underutilized setting to deliver naloxone to these people. The goal of this study was to identify Canadian emergency physicians' attitudes and perceived barriers to the implementation of take-home naloxone programs., Methods: This was an anonymous Web-based survey of members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. Survey questions were developed by the research team and piloted for face validity and clarity. Two reminder emails were sent to non-responders at 2-week intervals. Respondent demographics were collected, and Likert scales were used to assess attitudes and barriers to the prescription of naloxone from the ED., Results: A total of 459 physicians responded. The majority of respondents were male (64%), worked in urban tertiary centres (58.3%), and lived in Ontario (50.6%). Overall, attitudes to OEND were strongly positive; 86% identified a willingness to prescribe naloxone from the ED. Perceived barriers included support for patient education (57%), access to follow-up (44%), and inadequate time (37%). In addition to people at risk of overdose, 77% of respondents identified that friends and family members may also benefit., Conclusions: Canadian emergency physicians are willing to distribute take-home naloxone, but thoughtful systems are required to facilitate opioid OEND implementation. These data will inform the development of these programs, with emphasis on multidisciplinary training and education.

Background: Despite evidence supporting the implementation of supervised injection facilities (SIFs) by multiple stakeholders, no evaluation of emergency physicians' attitudes has ever been documented towards such facilities in Canada or internationally. The primary goal of our study was to determine the opinions and perceptions of emergency physicians regarding the implementation of SIFs in Canada., Methods: We conducted a national electronic survey of staff and resident emergency physicians in Canada using an iteratively designed survey tool in consultation with content experts. Invitations to complete the survey were sent via email by the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. Inclusion criteria required respondents to have treated an adult patient in a Canadian emergency department within the preceding 6 months. The primary measure was the proportion of respondents who would support, not support or were unsure of supporting SIFs in their community with the secondary measure being the likelihood of respondents to refer patients to a SIF if available., Results: We received 280 responses out of 1353 eligible physicians (20.7%), with the analysis conducted on 250 responses that met inclusion criteria (18.5%). The majority of respondents stated they would support the implementation of SIFs in their community (N=172; 74.5%) while 10.8% (N=25) would not and 14.7% (N=34) did not know. The majority of respondents said they would refer their patients to SIFs (N=198; 84.6%), with 4.3% (N=10) who would not and 11.1% (N=26) who were unsure., Conclusion: The findings from our study demonstrate that the majority of emergency physician respondents in Canada support the implementation of such sites (74.5%) while 84.6% of respondents would refer patients from the emergency department to such sites if they did exist. Given that many Canadian cities are actively pursuing the creation of SIFs or imminently opening such sites, it appears that our sample population of emergency physicians would both support this approach and would utilize such facilities in an effort to improve patient-centered outcomes for this often marginalized population., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are a number of screening tools to predict return to the emergency department (ED) in elderly trauma patients, but none exist to specifically screen for functional decline after a minor injury. The objective of this study was to identify outcome measures for a possible future clinical decision rule to be used in the ED to identify previously independent patients at high risk of functional decline at six months post minor injury., Methods: After a rigorous development process, a survey instrument was administered to a random sample of 178 emergency physicians using the Dillman's Tailored Design Method., Results: Of 156 eligible surveys, we received 81 completed surveys (response rate 51.9%). Considering all 14 activities of daily living (ADL) items, 90% of physicians deemed a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in function to be at least three points on the 28-point Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) ADL Scale as clinically significant. A tool with a sensitivity of 93% to detect patients at risk of functional decline at six months post injury would meet or exceed the sensitivity deemed to be required by 90% of physicians. The majority of emergency physicians do not assess elderly injured patients for the majority of the tasks., Conclusions: A drop of three points on the 28-point OARS ADL Scale would be deemed clinically important by the vast majority of emergency physicians. Further, a sensitivity of 93% for a clinical decision tool would satisfy the MCID requirements of the vast majority of emergency physicians. There appears to be a gap between physician knowledge and actual practice. We intend to use these findings in the development of a clinical decision rule to identify high-risk elderly trauma patients.

Background: Patients with a new transient ischemic attack (TIA) have a 5% subsequent stroke risk within 7 days. The Canadian TIA Score accurately determines the risk of subsequent stroke risk; however, it is unclear if physicians will use this new scale or how it will be used. Our objectives were to assess: (1) anticipated use; (2) component face validity; (3) risk strata for stroke within 7 days; and (4) actions required, for a given risk for subsequent stroke based on the proposed Canadian TIA Score., Methods: After a rigorous development process (sample selection, key informant interviews, development of questionnaire following Dillman Tailored Design technique, cognitive interviews, and pilot-testing), a survey questionnaire was administered to a random sample of 300 neurologists selected from all neurologists listed in a national medical directory. The surveys were distributed using a modified Dillman technique., Results: From a total of 265 eligible surveys, we received 140 (52.8%) completed surveys; 7 of 13 components comprising the Canadian TIA Score were rated as "very important" or "important" by survey respondents. Risk categories for subsequent stroke were defined as: minimal risk: less than 1%; low risk: 2%-4.9%; high risk: 5%-10%; critical risk: more than 10% risk of subsequent stroke within 7 days. Most (87.1%) of the neurologists would use a validated Canadian TIA Score., Conclusions: Neurologists appear ready to use a validated Canadian TIA Score in their clinical practice. Risk strata are definable, which may allow physicians to determine immediate actions, based on subsequent stroke risk., (Copyright © 2015 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The CAEP Stroke Practice Committee was convened in the spring of 2013 to revisit the 2001 policy statement on the use of thrombolytic therapy in acute ischemic stroke. The terms of reference of the panel were developed to include national representation from urban academic centres as well as community and rural centres from all regions of the country. Membership was determined by attracting recognized stroke leaders from across the country who agreed to volunteer their time towards the development of revised guidance on the topic. The guideline panel elected to adopt the GRADE language to communicate guidance after review of existing systematic reviews and international clinical practice guidelines. Stroke neurologists from across Canada were engaged to work alongside panel members to develop guidance as a dyad-based consensus when possible. There was no unique systematic review performed to support this guidance, rather existing efficacy data was relied upon. After a series of teleconferences and face to face meetings, a draft guideline was developed and presented to the CAEP board in June of 2014. The panel noted the development of significant new evidence to inform a number of clinical questions related to acute stroke management. In general terms the recommendations issued by the CAEP Stroke Practice Committee are supportive of the use of thrombolytic therapy when treatment can be administered within 3 hours of symptom onset. The committee is also supportive of system-level changes including pre-hospital interventions, the transport of patients to dedicated stroke centers when possible and tele-health measures to support thrombolytic therapy in a timely window. Of note, after careful deliberation, the panel elected to issue a conditional recommendation against the use of thrombolytic therapy in the 3–4.5 hour window. The view of the committee was that as a result of a narrow risk benefit balance, one that is considerably narrower than the same considerations under 3 hours, a significant number of informed patients and families would opt against the risk of early intracranial hemorrhage and the possibility of increased 90-day mortality that is not seen for more timely treatment. Furthermore, the frequently impaired nature of patients suffering an acute stroke and the difficulties in asking families to make life and death decisions in a highly time-sensitive context led the panel to restrict a strong endorsement of thrombolytic to the 3 hour outermost limit. The committee noted as well that Health Canada has not approved a thrombolytic agent beyond a three hour window in acute ischemic stroke.

Objectives: Physicians are a commonly targeted group in health research surveys, but their response rates are often relatively low. The goal of this paper was to evaluate the effect of unconditional incentives in the form of a coffee card on physician postal survey response rates., Design: Following 13 key informant interviews and eight cognitive interviews a survey questionnaire was developed., Participants: A random sample of 534 physicians, stratified by physician group (geriatricians, family physicians, emergency physicians) was selected from a national medical directory., Setting: Using computer generated random numbers; half of the physicians in each stratum were allocated to receive a coffee card to a popular national coffee chain together with the first survey mailout., Interventions: The intervention was a $10 Tim Hortons gift card given to half of the physicians who were randomly allocated to receive the incentive., Results: 265 (57.0%) physicians completed the survey. The response rate was significantly higher in the group allocated to receive the incentive (62.7% vs 51.3% in the control group; p=0.01)., Conclusions: Our results indicate that an unconditional incentive in the form of a coffee gift card can substantially improve physician response rates. Future research can look at the effect of varying amounts of cash on the gift cards on response rates., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Unlabelled: ABSTRACTObjective:There are currently no widely used guidelines to determine which older patients with acute respiratory conditions require hospital admission. This study assessed the need for clinical decision rules to help determine whether hospital admission is required for patients over 50 years for three common respiratory conditions: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart failure (HF), and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP)., Design: Postal survey., Setting: Emergency physicians (EPs) from the United States, Canada, and Australasia., Participants: A random sample of EPs from the United States, Canada, and Australasia., Interventions: A modified Dillman technique with a prenotification letter and up to three postal surveys., Main Outcomes: EP opinions regarding the need for and willingness to use clinical decision rules for emergency department (ED) patients over 50 years with COPD, HF, or CAP to predict hospital admission. We assessed the required sensitivity of each rule for return ED visit or death within 14 days., Results: A total of 801 responses from 1,493 surveys were received, with response rates of 55%, 60%, and 46% for Australasia, Canada, and the United States, respectively. Over 90% of EPs reported that they would consider using clinical decision rules for HF, CAP, and COPD. The median required sensitivity for death within 14 days was 97 to 98% for all conditions., Conclusions: EPs are likely to adopt highly sensitive clinical decision rules to predict the need for hospital admission for patients over 50 years with COPD, HF, or CAP.

Background and Purpose: Four percent to 10% of patients with transient ischemic attack (TIA) have a stroke or die within 1 week of their diagnosis. This national survey examined Canadian neurologists' current practice for managing TIA, the need for a clinical decision rule to identify high-risk patients, and the required sensitivity of such a rule., Methods: We surveyed 650 neurologists registered in a national physician directory. We used a modified Dillman technique with a prenotification letter and up to 5 survey attempts using a mailed letter. Neurologists were asked 33 questions about demographics, current management of adult patients with TIA, if a clinical decision rule is required to identify high-risk patients with TIA for impending stroke/death, and the required sensitivity of this rule., Results: We had a response rate of 49.8% (324 of 650). Respondents were 78.3% male and had a mean age of 50.3 years. Of respondents, 49.2% (95% CI: 45.3% to 53.1%) reported using an existing clinical tool to risk-stratify patients. Overall, 95.0% (95% CI: 93.3% to 96.7%) reported they would consider using a sensitive, validated clinical decision rule for risk-stratifying patients with TIA. The median required sensitivity of a rule was 92% (interquartile range, 90 to 95)., Conclusions: We found that Canadian neurologists would use a highly sensitive clinical decision rule to risk-stratify patients with TIA. The median required sensitivity of 92% is higher than the high risk category of any existing tool. Our results indicate a clinical decision rule to predict high-risk TIA needs to be more sensitive than the currently available rules.