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.
National trends in emergency department visits and hospitalizations for food‐induced anaphylaxis in US children
AbstractBackgroundFood 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsDuring the study period, participants had 7310 food‐induced anaphylaxis‐related emergency department visits. Emergency department visits for food‐induced anaphylaxis increased by 214% (P < .001); the highest rates were in infants and toddlers (age 0‐2 years). Rates of emergency department visits significantly increased in all age‐groups, with the highest increase in adolescents (age 13‐17 years: 413%; P < .001). Peanuts accounted for the highest rates (5.85 per 100 000 in 2014) followed by tree nuts/seeds (4.62 per 100 000 in 2014). The greatest increase in rates of emergency department visits for food‐induced anaphylaxis occurred with tree nuts/seeds (373.0% increase during the study period).ConclusionsThe incidence of food‐induced anaphylaxis has significantly increased over time in children of all ages. Food‐induced anaphylaxis in children is an important national public health concern.
Observation Status or Inpatient Admission: Impact of Patient Disposition on Outcomes and Utilization Among Emergency Department Patients With Chest Pain
AbstractObjectivesto compare healthcare utilization including coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), rehospitalization, and rate of subsequent acute myocardial infarction (AMI) within 30 days, among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain admitted as short‐term inpatient (≤2 days) versus observation (in‐ED observation units combined with in‐hospital observation).MethodsWe identified adults diagnosed with acute chest pain in the ED from 2010 to 2014 using administrative claims from privately insured and Medicare Advantage. Patients having AMI during the index visit were excluded. One‐to‐one propensity‐score matching and logistic regression were used. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.ResultsA total of 774,017 chest pain visits were included. After matching, healthcare utilization was lower among observation versus short inpatient, with 10.9% versus 24.4% (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.39) undergoing cardiac catheterization and 1.8% versus 7.6% (OR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.21 to 0.24) having PCI. The incidence of subsequent AMI within the following 30 days was similar in patients admitted as observation versus short inpatient (0.23% vs. 0.21%; OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.42).ConclusionsThere were higher rates of cardiac catheterization and PCI among those admitted as a short inpatient compared to observation, while the incidence of subsequent AMI within 30 days was similar.
Predicting Early Rapid Response Team Activation in Patients Admitted From the Emergency Department: The PeRRT Score
AbstractObjectivesRapid 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsThe 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%.ConclusionsIn 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.
The 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, “Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy‐relevant Patient‐centered Research Agenda” Diagnostic Testing Breakout Session Report
Abstract Diagnostic testing is an integral component of patient evaluation in the emergency department ( ED ). Emergency clinicians frequently use diagnostic testing to more confidently exclude “worst‐case” diagnoses rather than to determine the most likely etiology for a presenting complaint. Increased utilization of diagnostic testing has not been associated with reductions in disease‐related mortality but has led to increased overall healthcare costs and other unintended consequences (e.g., incidental findings requiring further workup, unnecessary exposure to ionizing radiation or potentially nephrotoxic contrast). Shared decision making ( SDM ) presents an opportunity for clinicians to discuss the benefits and harms associated with diagnostic testing with patients to more closely tailor testing to patient risk. This article introduces the challenges and opportunities associated with incorporating SDM into emergency care by summarizing the conclusions of the diagnostic testing group at the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference on SDM . Three primary domains emerged: 1) characteristics of a condition or test appropriate for SDM , 2) critical elements of and potential barriers to SDM discussions on diagnostic testing, and 3) financial aspects of SDM applied to diagnostic testing. The most critical research questions to improve engagement of patients in their acute care diagnostic decisions were determined by consensus.
Incidence of adverse events in paediatric procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Objective and design We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the incidence of adverse events in the emergency department (ED) during procedural sedation in the paediatric population. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies from the past 10 years were included. We adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Setting ED. Participants Children. Interventions Procedural sedation. Outcomes Adverse events like vomiting, agitation, hypoxia and apnoea. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effects model and reported as incidence rates with 95% CIs. Results A total of 1177 studies were retrieved for screening and 258 were selected for full-text review. 41 studies reporting on 13 883 procedural sedations in 13 876 children (≤18 years) were included. The most common adverse events (all reported per 1000 sedations) were: vomiting 55.5 (CI 45.2 to 65.8), agitation 17.9 (CI 12.2 to 23.7), hypoxia 14.8 (CI 10.2 to 19.3) and apnoea 7.1 (CI 3.2 to 11.0). The need to intervene with either bag valve mask, oral airway or positive pressure ventilation occurred in 5.0 per 1000 sedations (CI 2.3 to 7.6). The incidences of severe respiratory events were: 34 cases of laryngospasm among 8687 sedations (2.9 per 1000 sedations, CI 1.1 to 4.7; absolute rate 3.9 per 1000 sedations), 4 intubations among 9136 sedations and 0 cases of aspiration among 3326 sedations. 33 of the 34 cases of laryngospasm occurred in patients who received ketamine. Conclusions Serious adverse respiratory events are very rare in paediatric procedural sedation in the ED. Emesis and agitation are the most frequent adverse events. Hypoxia, a late indicator of respiratory depression, occurs in 1.5% of sedations. Laryngospasm, though rare, happens most frequently with ketamine. The results of this study provide quantitative risk estimates to facilitate shared decision-making, risk communication, informed consent and resource allocation in children undergoing procedural sedation in the ED.
Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation
Background The introduction of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants has been a major advance for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation; however, outcomes achieved in clinical trials may not translate to routine practice. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban by comparing each agent with warfarin. Methods and Results Using a large US insurance database, we identified privately insured and Medicare Advantage patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were users of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between October 1, 2010, and June 30, 2015. We created 3 matched cohorts using 1:1 propensity score matching: apixaban versus warfarin (n=15 390), dabigatran versus warfarin (n=28 614), and rivaroxaban versus warfarin (n=32 350). Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we found that for stroke or systemic embolism, apixaban was associated with lower risk (hazard ratio [ HR ] 0.67, 95% CI 0.46–0.98, P =0.04), but dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with a similar risk (dabigatran: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76–1.26, P =0.98; rivaroxaban: HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72–1.19, P =0.56). For major bleeding, apixaban and dabigatran were associated with lower risk (apixaban: HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34–0.59, P <0.001; dabigatran: HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67–0.94, P <0.01), and rivaroxaban was associated with a similar risk ( HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90–1.20], P =0.60). All non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants were associated with a lower risk of intracranial bleeding. Conclusions In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, apixaban was associated with lower risks of both stroke and major bleeding, dabigatran was associated with similar risk of stroke but lower risk of major bleeding, and rivaroxaban was associated with similar risks of both stroke and major bleeding in comparison to warfarin.
Comparative Trends and Downstream Outcomes of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography and Cardiac Stress Testing in Emergency Department Patients With Chest Pain: An Administrative Claims Analysis
AbstractObjectivesCoronary 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.MethodsUsing 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.ResultsDuring 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.ConclusionsCCTA 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.
Comparison of medical versus surgical management of peritonsillar abscess: A retrospective observational study