Ginsberg, Zachary

ABSTRACT Objective We sought to characterize patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with abdominal pain and to validate risk categories defined by the Guidelines for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE‐2) for low‐risk recurrent abdominal pain. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting with abdominal pain between November 2019 and November 2023 across 21 EDs in Arizona, the Midwest, and Florida. Patients were categorized per GRACE‐2 into recurrent and non‐recurrent pain as well as low‐ and high‐risk groups. Primary outcomes included 72‐h returns and mortality at 30 and 90 days. Results The study included 162,494 visits (112,896 unique patients; median age 46 years; 61.2% female). Among these, 4.3% had low‐risk recurrent abdominal pain. Patients with recurrent and non‐recurrent low‐risk pain had similar ED length of stay and discharge rates to each other, compared to patients with high‐risk pain who had longer length of stay and lower discharge rates. At 30 days after the ED encounter, patients with low‐risk recurrent abdominal pain had similar mortality to patients with low‐risk non‐recurrent pain (0.4% vs. 0.3%; adjusted RR = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.85–2.03), while they had significantly lower mortality than patients with high‐risk recurrent abdominal pain (0.4% vs. 2.3; adjusted RR = 3.14, 95% CI: 2.02–4.89). Conclusions This study highlights the heterogeneity in patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain. Among these patients, those with low‐risk recurrent pain demonstrated similar lengths of stay, discharges, and mortality rates to those with low‐risk non‐recurrent pain and less favorable lengths of stay, discharges, and mortality rates compared to those with any high‐risk features. These findings suggest that low‐ and high‐risk features may be more useful than recurrent or non‐recurrent pain in identifying patients who could benefit from more robust ED evaluations.

Emergency physician empathy and communication is increasingly important and influences patient satisfaction. This study investigated if there is a need for improvement in provider empathy and communication in our emergency department and what areas could be targeted for future improvement. Patients cared for by emergency physicians with the lowest satisfaction scores were surveyed within 1 week of discharge. Patients rated their emergency provider’s empathy and communication and provided feedback on the patient–provider interaction. Compared to survey responses nationally, our providers fell between the 10th and 25th percentiles for all questions, except question 5 (making a plan of action with [the patient]) which was between the 5th and 10th percentile. Areas most frequently cited for improvement were “wanting to know why” (N = 30), “time is short” (N = 15), and “listen to the patient” (N = 13). Survey percentiles and open-ended suggestions demonstrate a need for providers to give thorough explanations, spend more time with the patient, and demonstrate active listening. These themes can be used to strengthen the provider–patient relationship.

AbstractBackgroundSkin cancer prevalence is well‐characterized for white solid organ transplant recipients. Although the prevalence of skin cancer in non‐white (Black, Asian, Hispanic) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) has been assessed, no study has reported the prevalence of skin cancer in Native American (NA) KTRs. The aim of this study is to determine if the prevalence of skin cancer in NAKTRs is the same as in white KTRs.MethodsWe conducted a case‐controlled retrospective review from a single transplant center. One hundred thirteen NAKTRs who received a transplant between 2001 and 2011 were age‐ and transplant‐year matched with 113 white controls.ResultsThe 226 KTRs consisted of 141 (62.4%) men and 85 (37.6%) women, with a mean age of 50.2 ± 10.8 years. There was no skin cancer found in NAKTRs prior to or post transplantation, while seven (6.2%) white KTRs had eight skin cancers prior to transplantation, and 28 (24.8%) white KTRs developed 66 skin cancers post transplantation. Twenty‐two (19.5%) NAKTRs did not follow‐up with dermatology at this institution. The median follow‐up in NAKTRs was 3.3 years compared to 3.0 years in white KTRs.ConclusionNAKTRs have a decreased prevalence of skin cancer compared to their white counterparts.