Which factors influence the ED length-of-stay after anterior shoulder dislocations: a retrospective chart review in 716 cases.

BACKGROUND: Anterior shoulder dislocations (ASD) are commonly seen in Emergency Departments (ED). ED overcrowding is increasingly burdening many healthcare systems. Little is known about factors influencing ED length-of-stay (LOS) for ASD. This study defines the factors influencing ED LOS for ASD patients. METHODS: Retrospective chart reviews were performed on all patients ≥12 years admitted with an anterior shoulder dislocation at two regional hospitals in the Netherlands between 2010 and 2016. The electronic patient records were reviewed for baseline patient characteristics, trauma mechanism, reduction methods, medication used, complications and the LOS at the ED. The main objective was determining factors influencing the LOS in patients with an anterior shoulder dislocation at the ED. RESULTS: During the study period, 716 ASD occurred in 574 patients, 374 (65.2%) in males. There were 389 (54.3%) primary ASD; the remainder (327, 45.7%) were recurrent. Median LOS was 92 min (IQR 66 min), with a significantly shorter LOS in those with recurrent dislocations (p < 0.001), younger age group (p < 0.03) and in patients who received no medications in the ED (p < 0.001). Traction-countertraction and leverage techniques were associated with a significant more use of ED medication compared to other techniques. Although the use of more medication might suggest the LOS would be longer for these techniques, we did not find a significant difference between different reduction techniques and LOS. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge this study is the largest of its kind, demonstrating ED LOS in ASD patients is influenced by age, the need for medication and dislocation history, primary versus recurrent. Notably, we found that biomechanical reduction techniques, which are not primarily traction-countertraction or leverage techniques, e.g. scapular manipulation and Cunningham, were associated with less ED medication use. Further research is needed to define how reduction methods influence ED medication use, patient satisfaction and ED throughput times.

Different Perspectives on Predictability and Preventability of Surgical Readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Although unscheduled readmissions are increasingly being used as a quality indicator, only few readmission studies have focused on surgical patient populations. METHODS: An observational study "CURIOS@" was performed at three centers in the Netherlands. Readmitted patients and treating doctors were surveyed to assess the discharge process during index admission and their opinion on predictability and preventability of the readmission. Risk factors associated with predictability and preventability as judged by patients and their doctor were identified. Cohen's kappa was calculated to measure pairwise agreement of considering readmission as predictable/preventable. PRISMA root cause categories were used to qualify the reasons for readmission. RESULTS: In 237 unscheduled surgical readmissions, more patients assessed their readmissions to be likely preventable compared with their treating doctors (28.7% versus 6.8%; kappa, 0.071). This was also reflected in poor consensus about risk factors and root causes of these readmissions. When patients reported that they did not feel ready for discharge or requested their doctor to allow them to stay longer at discharge during index admission, they deemed their readmission more likely predictable and preventable. Doctors focused on measurable factors such as the clinical frailty scale and biomarkers during discharge process. Health-care worker failures were strongly associated with preventable readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus between readmitted patients and treating doctors about predictability and preventability of readmissions, nor about associated risk factors and root causes. Patients should be more effectively involved in their discharge process, and the relevance of optimal communication between them should be emphasized to create a safe and efficient discharge process.

BRASD trial: biomechanical reposition techniques in anterior shoulder dislocation-a randomized multicenter clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Biomechanical reduction techniques for shoulder dislocations have demonstrated high reduction success rates with a limited pain experience for the patient. We postulated that the combination of biomechanical reduction techniques with the shortest length of stay would also have the lowest pain experience and the highest first reduction success rate. METHODS: A randomized multicenter clinical trial was performed to compare different biomechanical reduction techniques in treating anterior shoulder dislocations without the use of invasive pain relief. Patients who were able to perform adduction of the arm were randomly assigned to Cunningham, the modified Milch, and the scapular manipulation technique. Those who were not able to do so were randomly assigned to modified Milch and the scapular manipulation technique. Primary outcomes were emergency department length of stay and pain experienced during the reduction process, measured by the numeric pain rating scale. Secondary outcomes were reduction time, reduction success, use of analgesics or sedatives, and complications. RESULTS: Three hundred eight patients were included, of whom 134 were in the adduction group. In both groups, no differences in emergency department length of stay and experienced pain were observed between the treatment arms. In the adduction group, the modified Milch technique had the highest first reduction success rates 52% (p = 0.016), within protocol 61% (p = 0.94), and with sedation in the ED 100% ( -). In the no-adduction group, the modified Milch was also the most successful primary reduction technique with 51% success (p = 0.040), within protocol 66% (p = 0.90), and with sedation in the ED 98% (p = 0.93). No complications were recorded in any of the techniques. CONCLUSION: A combination of biomechanical techniques resulted in a similar length of stay in the emergency department and showed similar pain scores with an overall high success rate of reduction. In both groups, the modified Milch had the highest first-reduction success rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5839-1 April 2016. Ethical committee Noord-Holland with the CCMO-number NL54173.094.15.

Trend analysis of emergency department malpractice claims in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, several quality improvement projects have been implemented in emergency departments (EDs) in the Netherlands, one of these being the training and deployment of emergency physicians. In this study we aim to perform a trend analysis of ED quality of care in Dutch hospitals, as measured by the incidence of medical malpractice claims. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a multicentre retrospective cohort study of malpractice claims in five Dutch EDs over the period 1998-2014. Incidence risk ratios were calculated to demonstrate any relation of specific quality improvement initiatives with the primary outcome, defined as the number of claims per 10 000 ED visits per year. RESULTS: During the study period, the cumulative number of ED visits increased significantly from 99 145 in 1998 to 162 490 in 2014 (P < 0.01). In total, 228 of 2 348 417 ED visits (0.97 per 10 000) resulted in a malpractice claim. At the same time, the yearly number of ED claims filed decreased with 0.07 (0.03-0.10) per 10 000 each year. The claim rate was higher in the period before emergency physicians were employed in the ED [1.18 (0.98-1.41) claims per 10 000 visits] compared with the period after they were employed [0.81 (0.67-0.97), incidence risk ratio 0.69 (0.53-0.89), P < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: Even though the number of ED visits increased significantly over the past two decades, the number of malpractice claims filed after an ED visit decreased. Various quality improvement initiatives, including the training and employment of emergency physicians, may have contributed to the observed decrease in claims.

Mid-arm circumference method is invalid to estimate the body weight of elderly Emergency Department patients in the Netherlands.

In the Emergency Department (ED) actual body weight (ABW) is essential for accurate drug dosing. Frequently, the ABW is unknown and direct measurement troublesome. A method using the mid-arm circumference (MAC) to estimate ABW has been developed and validated in the United States of America (USA). This study aimed to validate the MAC-formula for estimating ABW in the Dutch population and compare its performance within the American population.Data were obtained from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) and extracted from the American National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) datasets. We included all subjects' ≥70 years whose MAC and weight were recorded and obtained additional anthropometric data. We used the equation: kg = 4 × MAC-50 to estimate the ABW of all subjects and compared results.We retrieved 723 and 972 subjects from the Dutch and American dataset, respectively. The MAC is better correlated with ABW in the American dataset when compared with the Dutch dataset (Pearson r = 0.84 and 0.68, respectively). Bland-Altman bias was -7.49 kg (Limits-of-Agreement [LOA] -27.5 to 12.27 kg) and -0.50 kg (LOA -20.99 to 19.99 kg) in the Dutch and American datasets, respectively.The MAC based formula to estimate ABW is a promising tool for the elderly American population. However it is not accurate within the Dutch elderly ED population. Consequently, it is not applicable to Dutch EDs. This study highlights that the results of anthropometric studies performed within the USA are not per se generalizable to the European population.

Cola therapy for oesophageal food bolus impactions a case series.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective case series describes the use of cola to immediately treat complete oesophageal food bolus obstructions in the emergency centre. Short of emergent endoscopy - which is invasive, expensive, not without adverse events, and often unavailable in low-resource settings - no other proven therapies exist to relieve oesophageal food impactions. METHODS: We performed a chart review of adults with complete oesophageal food bolus obstructions presenting to two Dutch emergency centres. Our primary outcome was cola's success rate in resolving the obstruction. Our secondary outcome was adverse event occurrence. RESULTS: We identified 22 cola interventions in 19 patients, the majority of whom (77.3%) were male. The median age was 59 years (IQR 29-73). All presentations were due to meat impaction. Endoscopy revealed relevant upper gastrointestinal pathology in 54.5%. When initiated in the emergency centre, cola successfully resolved 59% of complete oesophageal obstructions. No adverse events were reported in patients successfully treated with cola. DISCUSSION: While keenly aware of our retrospective study's limitations, we found a promising success rate for cola as an acute intervention for oesophageal food bolus impactions. We registered no adverse events attributable to cola. Also, given that cola is cheap, widely available and seemingly safe we believe it can be considered in patients with oesophageal obstructions due to food, either as pre-endoscopy treatment or in case endoscopy is not available at all. We think our findings provide an impetus for prospective research on this intervention.

Biomechanical reposition techniques in anterior shoulder dislocation: a randomised multicentre clinical trial- the BRASD-trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Glenohumeral (shoulder) dislocations are the most common large joint dislocations seen in the emergency department (ED). They cause pain, often severe, and require timely interventions to minimise discomfort and tissue damage. Commonly used reposition or relocation techniques often involve traction and/or leverage. These techniques have high success rates but may be painful and time consuming. They may also cause complications. Recently, other techniques-the biomechanical reposition techniques (BRTs)-have become more popular since they may cause less pain, require less time and cause fewer complications. To our knowledge, no research exists comparing the various BRTs. Our objective is to establish which BRT or BRT combination is fastest, least painful and associated with the lowest complication rate for adult ED patients with anterior glenohumeral dislocations (AGDs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adults presenting to the participating EDs with isolated AGDs, as determined by radiographs, will be randomised to one of three BRTs: Cunningham, modified Milch or scapular manipulation. Main study parameters/endpoints are ED length of stay and patients' self-report of pain. Secondary study parameters/endpoints are procedure times, need for analgesic and/or sedative medications, iatrogenic complications and rates of successful reduction. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Non-biomechanical AGD repositioning techniques based on traction and/or leverage are inherently painful and potentially harmful. We believe that the three BRTs used in this study are more physiological, more patient friendly, less likely to cause pain, more time efficient and less likely to produce complications. By comparing these three techniques, we hope to improve the care provided to adults with acute AGDs by reducing their ED length of stay and minimising pain and procedure-related complications. We also hope to define which of the three BRTs is quickest, most likely to be successful and least likely to require sedative or analgesic medications to achieve reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR5839.

Evaluation of the necessity of clinical observation of high-energy trauma patients without significant injury after standardized emergency room stabilization.

BACKGROUND: Patients involved in a high-energy trauma (HET) are usually admitted for clinical observation, even when no significant injury is found after standard care in the emergency room (ER). The necessity of this observation period is not evidence based. The goal of this study was to identify patients who revealed an initially undiagnosed injury during the observation period. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive HET patients was conducted in two Level I trauma centers. Patients after a HET with two minor injuries or less, diagnosed during the standard ER care, were included. Data were abstracted from patients' medical records. RESULTS: Five hundred three patients were included. None of the patients developed any complications during the clinical observation period or were readmitted to their own hospital within a week after the trauma. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence for the necessity of clinical observation of HET patients with minimal or no injuries diagnosed after standard ER stabilization and evaluation.