Implementing wait-time reductions under Ontario government benchmarks (Pay-for-Results): a Cluster Randomized Trial of the Effect of a Physician-Nurse Supplementary Triage Assistance team (MDRNSTAT) on emergency department patient wait times.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, emergency departments are struggling with crowding and its associated morbidity, mortality, and decreased patient and health-care worker satisfaction. The objective was to evaluate the addition of a MDRNSTAT (Physician (MD)-Nurse (RN) Supplementary Team At Triage) on emergency department patient flow and quality of care. METHODS: Pragmatic cluster randomized trial. From 131 weekday shifts (8:00-14:30) during a 26-week period, we randomized 65 days (3173 visits) to the intervention cluster with a MDRNSTAT presence, and 66 days (3163 visits) to the nurse-only triage control cluster. The primary outcome was emergency department length-of-stay (EDLOS) for patients managed and discharged only by the emergency department. Secondary outcomes included EDLOS for patients initially seen by the emergency department, and subsequently consulted and admitted, patients reaching government-mandated thresholds, time to initial physician assessment, left-without being seen rate, time to investigation, and measurement of harm. RESULTS: The intervention's median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted, high acuity patients was 4:05 [95th% CI: 3:58 to 4:15] versus 4:29 [95th% CI: 4:19-4:38] during comparator shifts. The intervention's median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted, low acuity patients was 1:55 [95th% CI: 1:48 to 2:05] versus 2:08 [95th% CI: 2:02-2:14]. The intervention's median physician initial assessment time was 0:55 [95th% CI: 0:53 to 0:58] versus 1:21 [95th% CI: 1:18 to 1:25]. The intervention's left-without-being-seen rate was 1.5% versus 2.2% for the control (p = 0.06). The MDRNSTAT subgroup analysis resulted in significant decreases in median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted high (4:01 [95th% CI: 3:43-4:16]) and low acuity patients (1:10 95th% CI: 0:58-1:19]), as well as physician initial assessment time (0:25 [95th% CI: 0:23-0:26]). No patients returned to the emergency department after being discharged by the MDRNSTAT at triage. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduced delays and left-without-being-seen rate without increased return visits or jeopardizing urgent care of severely ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00991471 ClinicalTrials.gov.

Comparison of emergency department time performance between a Canadian and an Australian academic tertiary hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To compare performance and factors predicting failure to reach Ontario and Australian government time targets between a Canadian (Sunnybrook Hospital) and an Australian (Austin Health) academic tertiary-level hospitals in 2012, and to assess for change of factors and performance in 2016 between the same hospitals. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of patient administrative data in two calendar years. The main outcome measure was reaching Ontario and Australian ED time targets for admissions, high and low urgency discharges. Secondary outcomes were factors predicting failure to reach these targets. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2016, Sunnybrook and Austin experienced increased patient volume of 10.2% and 19.2%, respectively. Bed capacity decreased at Sunnybrook (-10.8%) but increased at the Austin (+30.3%). For both years, Austin failed to achieve the Australian time target, but succeeded for all Ontario targets except for low urgency discharges. Sunnybrook failed all targets irrespective of year. The top factors for failing Ontario ED length-of-stay targets for both hospitals in 2012 and 2016 were bed request greater than 6 h, access block greater than 1 h, use of cross-sectional imaging, consultation and waiting for the emergency physician greater than 2 h. CONCLUSION: Austin outperformed Sunnybrook for Ontario and Australian government time targets. Both hospitals failed the Australian targets. Factors predicting failure to achieve targets were different between hospitals, but were mainly clinical resources. Sunnybrook focussed on increasing human resources. Austin focussed on increasing human resources, observation unit and hospital beds. Intrinsic hospital characteristics and infrastructure influenced target success.

The impact of ambulance practice on acute stroke care.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Few patients with acute stroke are treated with alteplase, often due to significant prehospital delays after symptom onset. The aims of this study were to: (1) identify factors associated with rapid first medical assessment in the emergency department after a call for ambulance assistance, and (2) determine the impact of ambulance practice on times from the ambulance call to first medical assessment in the emergency department. METHODS: During a 6-month period in 2004, all ambulance-transported patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack arriving from a geographically defined region in Melbourne, Australia (population 383,000) to one of 3 hospital emergency departments were assessed prospectively. Ambulance records including the tape recording of the call for ambulance assistance and hospital medical records, were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-eight patients were included in the study. One hundred eighty-seven ambulance patient care records were complete and available for analysis. Factors associated with first medical assessment in the emergency department <60 minutes from the ambulance call and <10 minutes from hospital arrival were: Glasgow Coma Scale <13 (P<0.001 and P=0.021) and hospital prenotification (P=0.04 and P<0.001). Paramedic stroke recognition and hospital prenotification were associated with shorter times from the ambulance call to first medical assessment (P=0.001 and P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Paramedic stroke recognition and hospital prenotification are associated with shorter prehospital times from the ambulance call to hospital arrival and in-hospital times from hospital arrival to first medical assessment. This highlights the importance of including ambulance practice in comprehensive care pathways that span the whole process of stroke care.

Renal effects of an emergency department chloride-restrictive intravenous fluid strategy in patients admitted to hospital for more than 48 hours.

OBJECTIVE: Patients commonly receive i.v. fluids in the ED. It is still unclear whether the choice of i.v. fluids in this setting influences renal or patient outcomes. We aimed to assess the effects of restricting i.v. chloride administration in the ED on the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI). METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after trial with 5008 consecutive ED-treated hospital admissions in the control period and 5146 consecutive admissions in the intervention period. During the control period (18 February 2008 to 17 August 2008), patients received standard i.v. fluids. During the intervention period (18 February 2009 to 17 August 2009), we restricted all chloride-rich fluids. We used the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) staging to define AKI. RESULTS: Stage 3 of KDIGO-defined AKI decreased from 54 (1.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-1.4) to 30 (0.6%; 95% CI 0.4-0.8) (P = 0.006). The rate of renal replacement therapy did not change, from 13 (0.3%; 95% CI 0.2-0.4) to 8 (0.2%; 95% CI 0.1-0.3) (P = 0.25). After adjustment for relevant covariates, liberal chloride therapy remained associated with a greater risk of KDIGO stage 3 (hazard ratio 1.82; 95% CI 1.13-2.95; P = 0.01). On sensitivity assessment after removing repeat admissions, KDIGO stage 3 remained significantly lower in the intervention period compared with the control period (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: In a before-and-after trial, a chloride-restrictive strategy in an ED was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of stage 3 of KDIGO-defined AKI.

The Australasian Clinical Toxicology Investigators Collaboration randomized trial of different loading infusion rates of N-acetylcysteine.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine whether the incidence of adverse events caused by intravenous N -acetylcysteine is significantly less when the initial dose is infused over a 60-minute period compared with the standard infusion period of 15 minutes. A secondary objective is to assess the efficacy of the 2 treatment arms. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, prospective trial of patients who presented with acetaminophen poisoning and who were treated with N -acetylcysteine and had no history of hypersensitivity to N-acetylcysteine. Patients were randomly assigned to receive the initial dose of N-acetylcysteine over a 15-minute or 60-minute period. Baseline signs and symptoms and adverse events were serially evaluated before and during administration of N -acetylcysteine. Tests of liver injury and coagulation were collected at baseline and then at 12-hour intervals. RESULTS: The study was designed with an 80% power to detect a halving of the incidence of adverse events. Of 180 evaluable patients, 109 patients were randomized to the 15-minute group and 71 patients were randomized to the 60-minute group. The incidence of drug-related adverse events was 45% in the 15-minute group and 38% in the 60-minute group (95% confidence interval -8% to 22%). The study did not demonstrate a reduction of drug-related adverse outcomes with the 60-minute infusion. Incidence of maximum alanine aminotransferase levels indicating hepatotoxicity (serum level >1,000 IU/L) was 6.8% (5.6% for 15-minute, 8.7% for 60-minute). The difference did not attain statistical significance. CONCLUSION: This study did not demonstrate a reduction of drug-related adverse outcomes with the 60-minute infusion. The study also confirmed that early treatment with N -acetylcysteine (within 8 hours of ingestion) is more effective than later treatment.

Paracetamol toxicity: what would be the implications of a change in Australian treatment guidelines?

OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to study the implications for resource utilisation if Australia adopted recent revised UK treatment guidelines for paracetamol poisoning. METHODS: Retrospective database review of paracetamol toxicity presentations and calls from the Victorian Poisons Information Centre (VPIC) and Austin Hospital, Victoria, Australia, from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011. There were 200 presentations at the Austin Hospital, and the VPIC received 4272 calls regarding paracetamol toxicity. An analytical model was designed to estimate the cost of this additional treatment and referral to hospital. The main outcome measures were the potential increase in number of admissions requiring treatment with N-acetylcysteine (NAC), costs involved and increased number of referrals to hospitals by the VPIC. RESULTS: Twenty-five (12.5%, 95% confidence interval 8.4-17.6%, P < 0.01) patients in our study who did not qualify for NAC therapy based upon the current Australasian paracetamol treatment guideline would have received it if the revised UK guideline was followed. Eighteen (72%) of these presented with acute single ingestions of paracetamol. No patients re-presented to our hospital with acute liver injury or required admission to the liver transplant unit. CONCLUSIONS: Alignment of current Australian paracetamol treatment guidelines with those in the UK would result in an increase in ED attendances as directed by Poisons Information Centres and hospital admissions for antidotal treatment. This would be associated with increased health expenditure and inpatient bed utilisation. The present study does not support the clinical need for adoption of UK paracetamol treatment guidelines in Australia.

Review article: amphetamines and related drugs of abuse.

Acute amphetamine toxicity is a relatively common clinical scenario facing the Australasian emergency medicine physician. Rates of use in Australasia are amongst the highest in the world. Clinical effects are a consequence of peripheral and central adrenergic stimulation producing a sympathomimetic toxidrome and a spectrum of central nervous system effects. Assessment aims to detect the myriad of possible complications related to acute amphetamine exposure and to institute interventions to limit associated morbidity and mortality. Meticulous supportive care aided by judicial use of benzodiazepines forms the cornerstone of management. Beta blockers are contraindicated in managing cardiovascular complications. Agitation and hyperthermia must be treated aggressively. Discharge of non-admitted patients from the emergency department should only occur once physiological parameters and mental state have returned to normal. All patients should receive education regarding the dangers of amphetamine use.