Evaluating a medical directive for nurse-initiated analgesia in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Although acute pain is a common presentation in the Emergency Department (ED), analgesics are often delayed until the patient is seen by a physician. We assessed the effect of a medical directive for nurse-initiated analgesia on time to first dose of analgesics, proportion of patients receiving analgesics in less than 30min, and total length of stay in the ED. METHODS: A medical directive for nurse-initiated analgesia was introduced in our ED in October 2011. This before-after health record review included all patients presenting to the ED with musculoskeletal back pain in 4month periods before and after implementation of the medical directive. RESULTS: A total of 524 cases were reviewed, of which 401 were included - 201 and 200 in the before and after implementation groups respectively. After implementation there was a shorter time to first dose of analgesic (mean of 118 vs 160min, p<0.001), and a higher proportion of patients receiving analgesics in the first 30min (20% vs 4%, p<0.001). However there was no difference in total proportion of patients receiving analgesics (71% vs 67%, p=0.46) or total length of stay in the ED (337 vs 323min, p=0.51). CONCLUSIONS: A medical directive for nurse-initiated analgesia in the ED was associated with significantly reduced time to the first dose of analgesic, and increased the proportion of patients receiving analgesics within 30min. We can conclude that medical directives for nurse-initiated analgesia effectively improve the timeliness and quality of care for patients with acute pain.

Perceived facilitators and barriers to clinical clearance of the cervical spine by emergency department nurses: A major step towards changing practice in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a validation study on use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) by emergency department (ED) nurses to clear the c-spine in alert and stable trauma patients (N=3633). This survey sought to identify potential facilitators and barriers to an implementation policy that would allow nurses to clinically clear the c-spine of minor trauma patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective quantitative survey of ED nurses in six hospitals. Questions were developed from a previous qualitative survey at the same validation study EDs. RESULTS: 158 ED nurses were surveyed and 137 (86.7%) responded. Nurses strongly endorsed potential facilitators for nursing clearance of the c-spine, including 'Like to try new things at work' (96.4%) and 'Easy for me to take on new responsibilities' (96.4%). Most respondents were comfortable applying the rule (89.1%). Nurses endorsed potential barriers but at much lower rates, with the most common being 'Heavy workload makes it difficult to use the rule' (37.2%). Variation existed among hospitals for the facilitator 'Use of the rule would be useful to my practice', ranging from 81.8% to 100% endorsement (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: This survey was an important step towards the goal of empowering ED nurses to clinically clear the c-spine of alert and stable trauma patients. There was a high rate of endorsement of facilitators and a low rate of endorsement of barriers. We found variation between hospitals, emphasizing the importance of understanding local beliefs when seeking to change clinical practice. We are conducting an implementation trial based on this feedback.

Multicentre prospective validation of use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by triage nurses in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: The Canadian C-Spine Rule for imaging of the cervical spine was developed for use by physicians. We believe that nurses in the emergency department could use this rule to clinically clear the cervical spine. We prospectively evaluated the accuracy, reliability and acceptability of the Canadian C-Spine Rule when used by nurses. METHODS: We conducted this three-year prospective cohort study in six Canadian emergency departments. The study involved adult trauma patients who were alert and whose condition was stable. We provided two hours of training to 191 triage nurses. The nurses then assessed patients using the Canadian C-Spine Rule, including determination of neck tenderness and range of motion, reapplied immobilization and completed a data form. RESULTS: Of the 3633 study patients, 42 (1.2%) had clinically important injuries of the cervical spine. The kappa value for interobserver assessments of 498 patients with the Canadian C-Spine Rule was 0.78. We calculated sensitivity of 100.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0%-100.0%) and specificity of 43.4% (95% CI 42.0%-45.0%) for the Canadian C-Spine Rule as interpreted by the investigators. The nurses classified patients with a sensitivity of 90.2% (95% CI 76.0%-95.0%) and a specificity of 43.9% (95% CI 42.0%-46.0%). Early in the study, nurses failed to identify four cases of injury, despite the presence of clear high-risk factors. None of these patients suffered sequelae, and after retraining there were no further missed cases. We estimated that for 40.7% of patients, the cervical spine could be cleared clinically by nurses. Nurses reported discomfort in applying the Canadian C-Spine Rule in only 4.8% of cases. CONCLUSION: Use of the Canadian C-Spine Rule by nurses was accurate, reliable and clinically acceptable. Widespread implementation by nurses throughout Canada and elsewhere would diminish patient discomfort and improve patient flow in overcrowded emergency departments.