Goyal, Deepi G.

Objective Understanding patients’ wishes and preferences during hospitalisation is a crucial component of care. We identified a gap related to documentation of advance directives and patient preferences for care and focused on ensuring appropriate goals of care discussions were occurring and documented. Our aim was to improve the documentation of advance care planning notes to include 80% of targeted hospitalised patients. Patients and methods Hospitalised patients in two community hospitals were included. We performed serial Plan-Do-Measure-Act cycles. The first intervention introduced the ‘surprise question’ during an afternoon huddle. Intervention 2 emphasised documentation of the advance care planning note. The third intervention used a structured approach led by administrators at daily multidisciplinary huddles and identified patients with an Elderly Risk Assessment score of 16 or greater as targets for advance care planning documentation. Results From a baseline performance under 10%, we increased to greater than 80% of patients with Elderly Risk Assessment scores of 16 or higher having documented advance care planning. We were able to sustain this performance over subsequent years. Conclusion A structured approach that identifies a targeted population at higher risk of mortality, and implementation of a checklist at a daily multidisciplinary huddle provided sustained improvement in advance care planning documentation. This provides the opportunity for improved patient care that is aligned with their values and preferences.

AbstractBackgroundThe American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) in‐person Oral Certification Examination (OCE) was halted abruptly in 2020 due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The OCE was reconfigured to be administered in a virtual environment starting in December 2020.ObjectivesThe purpose of this investigation was to determine whether there was sufficient validity and reliability evidence to support the continued use of the ABEM virtual Oral Examination (VOE) for certification decisions.MethodsThis retrospective, descriptive study used multiple data sources to provide validity evidence and reliability data. Validity evidence focused on test content, response processes, internal structure (e.g., internal consistency and item response theory), and the consequences of testing. A multifaceted Rasch reliability coefficient was used to measure reliability. Study data were from two 2019 in‐person OCEs and the first four VOE administrations.ResultsThere were 2279 physicians who took the 2019 in‐person OCE examination and 2153 physicians who took the VOE during the study period. Among the OCE group, 92.0% agreed or strongly agreed that the cases on the examination were cases that an emergency physician should be expected to see; 91.1% of the VOE group agreed or strongly agreed. A similar pattern of responses given to a question about whether the cases on the examination were cases that they had seen. Additional evidence of validity was obtained by the use of the EM Model, the process for case development, the use of think‐aloud protocols, and similar test performance patterns (e.g., pass rates). For reliability, the Rasch reliability coefficients for the OCE and the VOE during the study period were all >0.90.ConclusionsThere was substantial validity evidence and reliability to support ongoing use of the ABEM VOE to make confident and defensible certification decisions.

Introduction Dermatologic complaints are a common reason for emergency department visits. Methods Retrospective chart review from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2019. Patients in the Mayo Clinic Emergency Department receiving dermatology consultation were included. Results Dermatitis (24.7%, n = 113), infection (20.4%, n = 93), and drug reaction (10.3%, n = 47) accounted for the majority of diagnoses. Emergency department providers often provide no diagnosis (38%) or a differential diagnosis (22%), and dermatology consultation frequently alters diagnosis (46%) and treatment (83%). Patients receiving in-person consultations are admitted more frequently than those receiving teledermatology consultations (40% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). Primary diagnostic concordance with subsequent dermatology evaluation is high for in-person (94%) and teledermatology (88%) consultations. Discussion This is the largest study of emergency department dermatology consultations in the United States and the first to compare in-person and teledermatology emergency department consultation utilization in clinical practice. These modalities are utilized in a complementary fashion at our institution, with severe dermatologic diagnoses seen in-person. The valuable role of emergency department dermatologists is highlighted by frequent changes to diagnosis and treatment plans that result from dermatology consultation. Furthermore, our data suggest that teledermatology is an effective modality with the potential to expand access to dermatologic expertise in the emergency department setting.

AbstractObjectivesBurnout afflicts emergency physicians (EPs) to a significant degree. The impact of burnout spans from decreased clinical efficiency to increased medical errors to heightened risk of physician suicide. This large‐scale study captures responses from emergency medicine (EM) residents regarding two burnout items and examines the correlation between in‐training examination (ITE) scores and burnout risk as well as that between residency year and burnout risk.MethodsThis was a prospective, mixed‐methods, cross‐sectional cohort study. All residents in U.S. categorical EM residents who took the 2019 ITE were included. At the end of the ITE, residents were invited to complete a voluntary survey that included two items from the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) that have been found to be strongly indicative of burnout: one about self‐perception of being burned out and one about feelings of callousness. Responses were on a 7‐level Likert scale (1–7), ranging from very low frequency (1) to very high frequency (7). Measurements included the number of residents in each year‐level of training (EM1–EM4), the MBI item ratings, and the ABEM ITE score. Performance, as measured by the scaled, equated score, was compared to the MBI item responses. A corrected Spearman’s correlation coefficient (ρ) was used to compare continuous data (score) against a discrete ordinal variable (MBI Likert response).ResultsThere were 2,501 EM1 residents, 2,389 EM2 residents, 2,206 EM3 residents, and 616 EM4 residents in the study group. There were 7,206 (93.4%) physicians who completed the first MBI question about burnout; 7,172 (93%) completed the second MBI question about callousness. There was no statistically significant association between the burnout item response and ITE performance (ρ = –0.03; p = 0.015). There was a positive, statistically significant association between the callousness item response and higher ITE performance (ρ = 0.07; p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant association between the response to the burnout item and training level (ρ = 0.07; p <0.001). There was also a statistically significant association between the response to the callousness item and training level (ρ = 0.15; p < 0.001). The overall prevalence of burnout risk in various training levels were EM1, 28.2%; EM2, 39%; EM3, 41.1%; and EM4, 43.3%.ConclusionsOur study found no significant correlation between ITE score and burnout risk. There was a weakly positive correlation between ITE scores and callousness. Based on our study results, ITE scores may not be useful in prognosticating burnout risk for EM residents and, interestingly, higher ITE scores correlated to stronger feelings of callousness. Our study indicates that EM residents at higher levels of training reported stronger self‐perceptions of burnout and callousness. Further investigation into why residents at higher levels of training may experience greater burnout risk is warranted.

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.

AbstractObjectiveThis study was undertaken to expand on results from a 2014 study on the association between physician age and performance on the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) ConCert examination.MethodsThis was a retrospective, longitudinal growth study comparing performance on the ConCert examination and physicians’ ages at the time of examination. All examination attempts from 1990 to 2016 made by residency‐trained physicians were eligible for inclusion. Multilevel growth models were constructed to examine the relationship between age at time of examination and performance, controlling for physician characteristics.ResultsThe study group included 15,533 examination attempts by 12,786 physicians. The mean (±SD) age of the physicians across all examination administrations was 45.02 (±5.18) years (range = 35 to 72 years). The mean (±SD) ConCert examination score across all administrations was 85.39 (±5.71; range = 51 to 100). Among first‐time ConCert examination takers, older age was associated with lower examination scores (r = –0.25, p < 0.0001). Across all examination attempts, age was negatively correlated to examination scores (r = –0.24; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsAfter physician characteristics were controlled for, there was an association between advancing age and declining performance on the ABEM ConCert examination. This information may be important to the individual physician to develop targeted competency assessment and professional development.

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.