Pediatric Patients Discharged After Transfer to a Pediatric Emergency Department: Opportunities for Telehealth?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Interemergency department pediatric transfers can be costly, involve risk, and may be disruptive to patients and families. Telehealth could be a way to safely reduce the number of transfers. We made an estimate of the proportion of transfers of pediatric patients to our emergency department (ED) that may have been avoidable using telehealth. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data of all pediatric patients (younger than 19 years) who were transferred to a single urban, academic medical center pediatric emergency department (PED) (annual pediatric volume approximately 15,000) between June 1, 2016, and December 29, 2021. We defined transfers as potentially avoidable with telehealth (the primary outcome) when the encounter at the receiving ED resulted in ED discharge and 1) met our definition of low-resource intensity (had no laboratory tests, diagnostic imaging, procedures, or consultations) or 2) could have used initial ED resources with telehealth guidance. RESULTS: Among 4,446 PED patients received in transfer during the study period, 406 (9%) were low-resource intensity. Of the non-low-resource intensity encounters, as many as another 1,103 (24.8%) potentially could have been avoided depending on available telehealth and initial ED resources, ranging from 210 (4.7%) with only telehealth specialty consultation to 538 (7.4%) with imaging and telehealth specialty consultation, and up to 1,034 (23.3%) with laboratory, imaging, and telehealth specialty consultation. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that depending on available telehealth and initial ED resources, between 9% and 33% of pediatric inter-ED transfers may have been avoidable. This information may guide health system design and PED operations when considering implementing pediatric telehealth.

The Value of an Emergency Medicine Virtual Observation Unit.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We implemented a virtual observation unit in which emergency department (ED) patients receive observation-level care at home. Our primary aim was to compare this new care model to in-person observation care in terms of brick-and-mortar ED length of stay (inclusive of ED observation unit time) as well as secondarily on inpatient admission and 72-hour return visits (overall and with admission). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data on ED observation patients from January 1, 2022 to December 29, 2022 from an academic urban ED, we used propensity matching to compare virtual to in-person observation patients on outcomes of interest. Patients were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and reason for observation. We also conducted real-time review of all virtual observation cases for potential safety concerns. RESULTS: Of 8,218 observation stays, 361 virtual observation patients were matched with 361 in-person observation patients. Virtual observation patients experienced lower median brick-and-mortar ED + EDOU LOS [14.6 (IQR 10.2, 18.9) versus 33.3 (IQR 28.1, 38.1) hours] and lower inpatient admission rates (10.2% [SD 5.0] versus 24.7% [SD 11.3]). The 72-hour return rate was higher for virtual observation patients (3.6% [SD 3.0] versus 2.5% [SD 3.0]). Among those with return visits, the rate of inpatient admission was higher among virtual observation patients (53.8% [SD 3.2] versus 11.1% [13.0]). There were no significant patient safety events recorded. CONCLUSION: Virtual observation unit patients used fewer hours in ED and ED observation relative to on-site observation patients. This new care delivery model warrants further study because it has the potential to positively impact ED capacity.

Patient Perceptions of Emergency Department Observation Care at Home.

Introduction: The Virtual Observation Unit (VOU) utilizes telehealth and community paramedicine to provide observation-level care in patients' homes. Patients' experience of this novel program has not been reported. Methods: A phone-based patient experience survey was administered to the patients who were admitted to the VOU at an urban, academic Emergency Department in the Northeast United States. The survey asked about patient's perception of the program's quality of care (0 = worst care possible, 10 = best care possible). t Tests with a Bonferroni adjustment assessed for differences between patient demographic groups. Results: The survey response rate was 40% (124/307). Overall mean scores for perceived quality of care were very high (9.51 ± 1.19). There were no significant differences in patient's perception of quality of care between demographic cohorts of age, gender, race, or ethnicity. Conclusions: Patient experience with a novel VOU program was very positive and did not differ significantly by demographic cohort. Further research is warranted.

Emergency Department and Health Care System Factors Associated with Telehealth Innovation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objective: Telehealth capacity may be an important component of pandemic response infrastructure. We aimed to examine changes in the telehealth use by the US emergency departments (EDs) during COVID-19, and to determine whether existing telehealth infrastructure or increased system integration were associated with increased likelihood of use. Methods: We analyzed 2016-2020 National ED Inventory (NEDI)-USA data, including ED characteristics and nature of telehealth use for all US EDs. American Hospital Association data characterized EDs' system integration. An ordinary least-squares regression model obtained one-step-ahead forecast of the expected proportion of EDs using telehealth in 2020 based on growth observed from 2016 to 2019. Among EDs without telehealth in 2019, we used logistic regression models to examine whether system membership or existing telehealth infrastructure were associated with odds of innovation in telehealth use in 2020, accounting for ED characteristics. Results: Of 4,038 EDs responding to telehealth questions in 2019 and 2020 (73% response rate), 3,015 used telehealth in 2020. Telehealth use by US EDs increased more than expected in 2020 (2016: 58%, 2017: 61%, 2018: 65%, 2019: 67%, 2020: 74%, greater than predicted 71%, p = 0.004). Existing telehealth infrastructure was associated with increased telehealth innovation (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.49-2.36), whereas hospital system membership was not (odds ratio [OR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-1.25). Conclusions: Telehealth use by US EDs in 2020 grew more than expected and preexisting telehealth infrastructure was associated with increased innovation in its use. Preparation for future pandemic responses may benefit from considering strategies to invest in local infrastructure to facilitate technology adoption and innovation.

Emergency Departments' Uptake of Telehealth for Stroke Versus Pediatric Care: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth for emergency stroke care delivery (telestroke) has had widespread adoption, enabling many hospitals to obtain stroke center certification. Telehealth for pediatric emergency care has been less widely adopted. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to determine whether differences in policy or certification requirements contributed to differential uptake of telestroke versus pediatric telehealth. We hypothesized that differences in financial incentives, based on differences in patient volume, prehospital routing policy, and certification requirements, contributed to differential emergency department (ED) adoption of telestroke versus pediatric telehealth. METHODS: We used the 2016 National Emergency Department Inventory-USA to identify EDs that were using telestroke and pediatric telehealth services. We surveyed all EDs using pediatric telehealth services (n=339) and a convenience sample of the 1758 EDs with telestroke services (n=366). The surveys characterized ED staffing, transfer patterns, reasons for adoption, and frequency of use. We used bivariate comparisons to examine differences in reasons for adoption and use between EDs with only telestroke services, only pediatric telehealth services, or both. RESULTS: Of the 442 EDs surveyed, 378 (85.5%) indicated use of telestroke, pediatric telehealth, or both. EDs with both services were smaller in bed size, volume, and ED attending coverage than those with only telestroke services or only pediatric telehealth services. EDs with telestroke services reported more frequent use, overall, than EDs with pediatric telehealth services: 14.1% (45/320) of EDs with telestroke services reported weekly use versus 2.9% (8/272) of EDs with pediatric telehealth services (P<.001). In addition, 37 out of 272 (13.6%) EDs with pediatric telehealth services reported no consults in the past year. Across applications, the most frequently selected reason for adoption was "improving level of clinical care." Policy-related reasons (ie, for compliance with outside certification or standards or for improving ED performance on quality metrics) were rarely indicated as the most important, but these reasons were indicated slightly more often for telestroke adoption (12/320, 3.8%) than for pediatric telehealth adoption (1/272, 0.4%; P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: In 2016, more US EDs had telestroke services than pediatric telehealth services; among EDs with the technology, consults were more frequently made for stroke than for pediatric patients. The most frequently indicated reason for adoption among all EDs was related to clinical care.

Assessing Clinical Skills Via Telehealth Objective Standardized Clinical Examination: Feasibility, Acceptability, Comparability, and Educational Value.

Introduction: In March 2020, students' in-person clinical assessments paused due to COVID-19. The authors adapted the June Objective Standardized Clinical Examination (OSCE) to a telehealth OSCE to preserve live faculty observation of students' skills and immediate feedback dialogue between students, standardized patients, and faculty members. The authors assessed students' reactions and comparative performance. Materials and Methods: OSCE and telehealth educators used draft Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) telehealth competencies to create educational materials and adapt OSCE cases. Students anonymously answered queries about the challenges of the telehealth encounters, confidence in basic telehealth competencies, and educational value of the experience. Cohort-level performance data were compared between the January in-person and June telehealth OSCEs. Results: One hundred sixty students participated in 29 Zoom® two-case telehealth OSCEs, equaling 58 h of assessment time. Survey response rate: 59%. Students indicated moderate challenge in adapting physical examinations to the telehealth format and indicated it to be cognitively challenging. Confidence in telehealth competencies was rated "moderate" to "very," but was most pronounced for the technical aspects of telehealth, rather than safety engagement with a patient. Although authors found no significant difference in cohort-level performance in total scores and history-taking between the OSCEs, physical examination and communication scores differed between the two assessments. Discussion: It was feasible to adapt a standardized OSCE to a telehealth format when in-person clinical skills assessment was impossible. Students rated this necessary innovation positively, and it adequately assessed foundational clinical skills performance. Conclusion: Given future competency needs in telehealth, we suggest several education and training priorities.

Telemedicine Facilitation of Transfer Coordination From Emergency Departments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Interhospital transfers are costly to patients and to the health care system. The use of telemedicine may enable more efficient systems by decreasing transfers or diverting transfers from crowded referral emergency departments (EDs) to alternative appropriate facilities. Our primary objective is to describe the prevalence of telemedicine for transfer coordination among US EDs, the ways in which it is used, and characteristics of EDs that use telemedicine for transfer coordination. METHODS: We used the 2016 National Emergency Department Inventory-USA survey to identify telemedicine-using EDs. We then surveyed all EDs using telemedicine for transfer coordination and a sample of EDs using telemedicine for other clinical applications. We used a multivariable logistic regression model to identify characteristics independently associated with use of telemedicine for transfer coordination. RESULTS: Of the 5,375 EDs open in 2016, 4,507 responded to National Emergency Department Inventory-USA (84%). Only 146 EDs used telemedicine for transfer coordination; of these, 79 (54%) used telemedicine to assist with clinical care for local admission, 117 (80%) to assist with care before transfer, and 92 (63%) for arranging transfer to a different hospital. Among telemedicine-using EDs, lower ED annual visit volume (odds ratio 5.87, 95% CI 2.79 to 12.36) was independently associated with use of telemedicine for transfer coordination. CONCLUSION: Although telemedicine has potential to improve efficiency of regional emergency care systems, it is infrequently used for coordination of transfer between EDs. When used, it is most often to assist with clinical care before transfer.

Understanding Barriers to Telemedicine Implementation in Rural Emergency Departments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Telemedicine has potential to add value to the delivery of emergency care in rural emergency departments (EDs); however, previous work suggests that it may be underused. We seek to understand barriers to telemedicine implementation in rural EDs, and to describe characteristics of rural EDs that do and do not use telemedicine. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from the 2016 National Emergency Department Inventory survey, identifying rural EDs that did and did not use telemedicine in 2016. All rural EDs that did not use telemedicine were administered a follow-up survey asking about ED staffing, transfer patterns, and perceived barriers to telemedicine use. We used a similar instrument to survey a sample of EDs that did use telemedicine, but we replaced the question about barriers with questions related to telemedicine use. Data are presented with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We identified 977 rural EDs responding to the 2016 National Emergency Department Inventory-USA survey; 453 (46%; 95% confidence interval 43% to 50%) did not use telemedicine. Among rural nonusers, 374 EDs (83%; 95% confidence interval 79% to 86%) responded to our second survey. Of the 177 rural EDs using telemedicine that we surveyed, 153 responded (86%; 95% confidence interval 80% to 91%). Among rural EDs not using telemedicine, 235 (67%) reported that their ED, hospital, or health system leadership had considered it. Cost was the most commonly cited reason for lack of adoption (n=86; 37%). CONCLUSION: Among US rural EDs, cost is a commonly reported barrier that may be limiting the extent of telemedicine adoption.

Telehealth Ethics: The Role of Care Partners.

During telehealth encounters, care partners may assist with physical maneuvers or examinations. These care partners may be friends or family members of the patient. There are unique ethical considerations in the use of care partners during telehealth examinations, yet there is limited guidance for such interactions. Evidence-based guidelines should be created to ensure the safety and quality of telehealth encounters when care partners are used.

Flexible nasotracheal intubation compared to blind nasotracheal intubation in the setting of simulated angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Nasotracheal intubation is rarely performed in the emergency department (ED) but may be required in specific situations such as angioedema. Both blind and flexible nasal intubation (FNI) may be utilized; however, the preferred technique is unknown. METHODS: We performed a randomized, crossover manikin study using a convenience sample of emergency physicians and medical students from a local community teaching hospital. Using a simulated angioedema model, we sought to compare the time required to successfully perform nasotracheal intubation between traditional blind nasotracheal intubation and FNI. Participants performed nasal intubation with both FNI using the Ambu aScope Slim (Ambu, Ballarup, Denmark) and blind nasal intubation with a Parker Endotrol tube (Parker, CO) in random order. Number of attempts and time to successful intubation (TTI) were compared between treatment devices. Providers were stratified by experience level, defining junior providers as post-graduate level 2 and below (including medical students) and all others as senior providers. RESULTS: We enrolled a convenience sample of 20 providers ranging from medical students to attendings. Overall, the TTI did not differ between blind and FNI intubation techniques (difference in seconds; 95% confidence interval) (21.4; -2.1 to 44.9; p = 0.07). This was consistent across provider types: senior providers (26.6; -17.7 to 71; p = 0.24) and junior providers (18.6; -8.3 to 46.5; p = 0.18). Number of attempts was similar between techniques (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: FNI and blind nasal intubation require similar time to intubation in this simulated model of angioedema.

How we implemented a resident-led medical simulation curriculum in a large internal medicine residency program.

Mannequin-based simulation in graduate medical education has gained widespread acceptance. Its use in non-procedural training within internal medicine (IM) remains scant, possibly due to the logistical barriers to implementation of simulation curricula in large residency programs. We report the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Medicine's scale-up of a voluntary pilot program to a mandatory longitudinal simulation curriculum in a large IM residency program (n = 54). We utilized an eight-case curriculum implemented over the first four months of the academic year. An intensive care unit curriculum was piloted in the spring. In order to administer a comprehensive curriculum in a large residency program where faculty resources are limited, thirty second-year and third-year residents served as session facilitators and two senior residents served as chairpersons of the program. Post-session anonymous survey revealed high learner satisfaction scores for the mandatory program, similar to those of the voluntary pilot program. Most interns believed the sessions should continue to be mandatory. Utilizing residents as volunteer facilitators and program leaders allowed the implementation of a well-received mandatory simulation program in a large IM residency program and facilitated program sustainability.

A protocol to determine the acceptability and feasibility of a pilot intervention emergency department virtual observation unit fall prevention program.

BACKGROUND: As a third of all community dwellers aged 65+ fall each year, falls are common reasons for older adults to present to an Emergency Department (ED). Although EDs should assess patients' multifactorial fall risks to prevent future fall-related injuries, this frequently does not occur. We describe our protocol to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a pilot ED Virtual Observation Unit (VOU) Falls program. METHODS: To ensure standardized conduct and reporting, the Standard Protocol Items for Intervention Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines will be used. The VOU is a program where patients are sent home from the ED but are part of a virtual observation unit in that they can call on-call ED physicians while they are being treated for conditions such as cellulitis, congestive heart failure, or pneumonia. A paramedic conducts daily visits with the patient and facilitates a telemedicine consult with an ED physician. VOU nursing staff conduct daily assessments of patients via telemedicine. The ED VOU Falls program is one of the VOU pathways and is a multi-component fall prevention program for fall patients who present after an ED visit. The paramedic conducts a home safety evaluation, a Timed Up and Go Test (TUG). During the VOU visit, the ED physician conducts a telemedicine visit, while the paramedic is visiting the home, to review patients' fall-risk-increasing drugs and their TUG test. We will determine feasibility by calculating rates of patient enrollment refusal, and adherence to fall-risk prevention recommendations using information from 3-month follow-up telephone calls, as well as qualitative interviews with the paramedics. We will determine the acceptability of the ED VOU Falls program based on patient and provider surveys using a Likert scale. We will ask VOU nursing staff to report any safety issues encountered while the patient is in the ED VOU Falls program (e.g., tripping hazards). We will use the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, Student's t-test for continuous variables, and Mann-Whitney for nonparametric data. We will review interview transcripts and generate codes. Codes will then be extracted and organized into concepts to generate an overall theme following grounded theory methods. This is a pilot study; hence, results cannot be extrapolated. However, a definite trial would be the next step in the future to determine if such a program could be implemented as part of fall prevention interventions. DISCUSSION: This study will provide insights into the feasibility and acceptability of a novel ED VOU Falls program with the aim of ultimately decreasing falls. In the future, such a program could be implemented as part of fall prevention interventions.

Simulated video-based telehealth training for emergency physicians.

Introduction: Little exists in the literature describing video-based telehealth training, especially for practicing Emergency Physicians. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective, pre- and post-assessment of physicians' knowledge and confidence on video-based telehealth after two simulated telehealth encounters. Attending physicians voluntarily participated in Zoom-based trainings and received feedback from the patient actors immediately after each simulation. Post-experience surveys queried participants on the training, aspects of telehealth, and confidence in features of optimal telehealth practice. Results: The survey had 100% response rate (13/13 physicians). Participants recommended the simulated training experience, mean of 8.38 (SD 1.89; 0 = Not at all likely, 10 = Extremely likely). Pre- and post-response means increased in two questions: "I can describe at least two ways to improve my video-based clinical care": delta: 1.54, t(12) = 3.83, p = 0.002, Cohen's d effect size of 1.06, and "I know when video-based telehealth could be helpful in clinical practice": delta: 0.99, t(12) = 3.09, p = 0.009, Cohen's d effect size of 0.86. Conclusion: In this pilot, participants viewed telehealth more favorably after the experience and indicated improved confidence in focused telehealth skills. Further study is needed to determine what simulated case content provides the most value for decision-making via telehealth.

Implementing a COVID-19 Virtual Observation Unit in Emergency Medicine: Frontline Clinician and Staff Experiences.

The COVID-19 pandemic pushed hospitals to deliver care outside of their four walls. To successfully scale virtual care delivery, it is important to understand how its implementation affects frontline workers, including their teamwork and patient-provider interactions. We conducted in-depth interviews of 17 clinicians and staff involved with the COVID-19 Virtual Observation Unit (CVOU) in the emergency department (ED) of an academic hospital. The program leveraged remote patient monitoring and mobile integrated health care. In the CVOU (vs. the ED), participants observed increases in interactions among clinicians and staff, patient participation in care delivery, attention to nonmedical factors, and involvement of coordinators and paramedics in patient care. These changes were associated with unintended, positive consequences for staff, namely, feeling heard, experience of meaningfulness, and positive attitudes toward virtual care. This study advances research on reconfiguration of roles following implementation of new practices using digital tools, virtual work interactions, and at-home care delivery.

Patient Experience With an In-Home COVID Virtual Observation Unit: An Analysis.

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a novel, home-based COVID Virtual Observation Unit (CVOU) from an urban, university-affiliated emergency department with ∼112,000 annual visits. Telephone-based survey questions were administered by nursing staff working with the program. Of 402 patients enrolled in the CVOU, 221 (55%) were able to be contacted during the study period; 180 (45%) agreed to participate in the telephone interview. Overall, 95% (169 out of 177) of the surveyed patients reported 8 to 10 on the likelihood to recommend CVOU and 82% (100 out of 122) rated the quality of care as 10 out of 10. Over 90% of respondents reported that all role groups (nurses, paramedics, and physicians) treated them with courtesy and respect, explained things in an understandable way, and listened to them carefully. Over 80% of respondents reported that the program kept them at home. In summary, patient experiences with this novel home-based care program were highly positive. These data help underscore the importance of patient-centeredness in home-based care, and further support the concept of these innovative care models.

Can video-based telehealth examinations of the abdomen safely determine the need for imaging?

There is little evidence on the reliability of the video-based telehealth physical examinations. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a physician-directed abdominal examination using telehealth. This was a prospective, blinded observational study of patients >19 years of age presenting with abdominal pain to a large, academic emergency department. In addition to their usual care, patients had a video-based telehealth examination by an emergency physician early in the visit. We compared the in-person and telehealth providers' decisions on imaging. Thirty patients were enrolled and providers' recommendations for imaging were YES (telehealth: 18 (60%); in-person: 22 (73%)), UNSURE (telehealth: 9 (30%); in-person: 2 (7%)) and NO (telehealth: 6 (20%); in-person: 3 (10%)). There were 20 patients for whom both telehealth and in-person providers were not unsure; of these, 16 (80%, 95% confidence interval 56.3-94.3%) patients had a provider agreement on the need for imaging. While the use of video-based telehealth may be feasible for patients seeking emergency department care for abdominal pain, further study is needed to determine how it may be safely deployed. Currently, caution should be exercised when evaluating the need for abdominal imaging remotely.

Can tablet video-based telehealth assessment of the abdomen safely determine the need for abdominal imaging? A pilot study.

Objective: There is limited evidence on the reliability of video-based physical examinations. We aimed to evaluate the safety of a remote physician-directed abdominal examination using tablet-based video. Methods: This was a prospective observational pilot study of patients >19 years old presenting with abdominal pain to an academic emergency department July 9, 2021-December 21, 2021. In addition to usual care, patients had a tablet video-based telehealth history and examination by an emergency physician who was otherwise not involved in the visit. Both telehealth and in-person clinicians were asked about the patient's need for abdominal imaging (yes/no). Thirty-day chart review searched for subsequent ED visits, hospitalizations, and procedures. Our primary outcome was agreement between telehealth and in-person clinicians on imaging need. Our secondary outcome was potentially missed imaging by the telehealth physicians leading to morbidity or mortality. We used descriptive and bivariate analyses to examine characteristics associated with disagreement on imaging needs. Results: Fifty-six patients were enrolled; the median age was 43 years (interquartile range: 27-59), 31 (55%) were female. The telehealth and in-person clinicians agreed on the need for imaging in 42 (75%) of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62%-86%), with moderate agreement with Cohen's kappa ((k = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.15-0.67). For study patients who had a procedure within 24 hours of ED arrival (n = 3, 5.4%, 95% CI: 1.1%-14.9%) or within 30 days (n = 7, 12.5%, 95% CI: 5.2%-24.1%), neither telehealth physicians nor in-person clinicians missed timely imaging. Conclusion: In this pilot study, telehealth physicians and in-person clinicians agreed on the need for imaging for the majority of patients with abdominal pain. Importantly, telehealth physicians did not miss the identification of imaging needs for patients requiring urgent or emergent surgery.

Neurologic complaints in a patient with infective endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Infectious intracranial aneurysms constitute a small subgroup of all intracranial aneurysms, but are an important cause of neurologic complaints in patients with infective endocarditis. OBJECTIVE: To describe a potentially fatal cause of neurologic complaints in patients with endocarditis. CASE REPORT: We report a case of a 33-year-old woman with Streptococcus sanguinis endocarditis and several neurologic complaints including right arm numbness, confusion, and occasional word-finding difficulty that were found to be secondary to infectious intracranial aneurysm. CONCLUSION: Early consideration of intracranial infectious aneurysm in patients with infective endocarditis and neurologic symptoms is critical. Therapeutic intervention is often effective, and risk of aneurysm rupture is high.