Improving Emergency Department Care for Aging Missourians: Guidelines, Accreditation, and Collaboration.

Aging baby-boomers present significant challenges to accessible, affordable emergency care in America for patients of all ages. St. Louis physicians served as early innovators in the field of geriatric emergency medicine. This manuscript summarizes a multi-institutional November 2016 symposium reviewing the Missouri history of geriatric emergency care. In addition, this manuscript describes multispecialty organizations' guidelines, healthcare outcomes research, contemporary medical education paradigms, and evolving efforts to disseminate guideline-based geriatric emergency care using a "Boot Camp" approach and implementation science. This manuscript also reviews local adaptations to emergency medical services and palliative care, as well as the perspectives of emergency department leaders exploring the balance between infrastructure and personnel required to promote guideline-based geriatric emergency care with the anticipated benefits. This discussion is framed within the context of the American College of Emergency Physician's planned geriatric emergency department accreditation process scheduled to begin in 2018.

Before-after study of a standardized hospital order set for the management of septic shock.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a standardized hospital order set for the management of septic shock in the emergency department. DESIGN: Before-after study design with prospective consecutive data collection. SETTING: Emergency department of a 1,200-bed academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 120 patients with septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of a standardized hospital order set for the management of septic shock. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 120 consecutive patients with septic shock were identified. Sixty patients (50.0%) were managed before the implementation of the standardized order set, constituting the before group, and 60 (50.0%) were evaluated after the implementation of the standardized order set, making up the after group. Demographic variables and severity of illness measured by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II were similar for both groups. Patients in the after group received statistically more intravenous fluids while in the emergency department (2825 +/- 1624 mL vs. 3789 +/- 1730 mL, p = .002), were more likely to receive intravenous fluids of >20 mL/kg body weight before vasopressor administration (58.3% vs. 88.3%, p < .001), and were more likely to be treated with an appropriate initial antimicrobial regimen (71.7% vs. 86.7%, p = .043) compared with patients in the before group. Patients in the after group were less likely to require vasopressor administration at the time of transfer to the intensive care unit (100.0% vs. 71.7%, p < .001), had a shorter hospital length of stay (12.1 +/- 9.2 days vs. 8.9 +/- 7.2 days, p = .038), and a lower risk for 28-day mortality (48.3% vs. 30.0%, p = .040). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that the implementation of a standardized order set for the management of septic shock in the emergency department was associated with statistically more rigorous fluid resuscitation of patients, greater administration of appropriate initial antibiotic treatment, and a lower 28-day mortality. These data suggest that the use of standardized order sets for the management of septic shock should be routinely employed.