Racial, Ethnic, and Age-Related Disparities in Sedation and Restraint Use for Older Adults in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults may present to the emergency department (ED) with agitation, a symptom often resulting in chemical sedation and physical restraint use which carry significant risks and side effects for the geriatric population. To date, limited literature describes the patterns of differential restraint use in this population. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used electronic health records data from ED visits by older adults (age ≥65 years) ranging 2015-2022 across nine hospital sites in a regional hospital network. Logistic regression models were estimated to determine the association between patient-level characteristics and the primary outcomes of chemical sedation and physical restraint. RESULTS: Among 872,587 ED visits during the study period, 11,875 (1.4%) and 32,658 (3.7%) encounters involved the use of chemical sedation and physical restraints respectively. The populations aged 75-84, 85-94, 95+ years had increasingly higher odds of chemical sedation [adjusted odds ratios (AORs) 1.35 (95% CI 1.29-1.42); 1.82 (1.73-1.91); 2.35 (2.15-2.57) respectively] as well as physical restraint compared to the 65-74 group [AOR 1.31 (1.27-1.34); 1.55 (1.50-1.60); 1.69 (1.59-1.79)]. Compared to the White Non-Hispanic group, the Black Non-Hispanic and Hispanic/Latinx groups had significantly higher odds of chemical sedation [AOR 1.26 (1.18-1.35); AOR 1.22 (1.15-1.29)] and physical restraint [AOR 1.12 (95% CI 1.07-1.16); 1.22 (1.18-1.26)]. CONCLUSION: Approximately one in 20 ED visits among older adults resulted in chemical sedation or physical restraint use. Minoritized group status was associated with increasing use of chemical sedation and physical restraint, particularly among the oldest old. These results may indicate the need for further research in agitation management for historically marginalized populations in older adults.

Total and Out-of-Pocket Costs Surrounding Emergency Department Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify differences in total and out-of-pocket health care costs associated with treat-and-release emergency department (ED) visits among older adults with traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage. METHODS: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis of treat-and-release ED visits using 2015 to 2020 data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. We measured total and out-of-pocket health care spending during 3 time periods: the 30 days prior to the ED visit, the treat-and-release ED visit itself, and the 30 days after the ED visit. Stratified by traditional Medicare or Medicare Advantage status, we determined median total costs and the proportion of costs that were out-of-pocket. RESULTS: Among the 5,011 ED visits by those enrolled in traditional Medicare, the weighted median total (and % out-of-pocket) costs were $881.95 (13.3%) for the 30 days prior to the ED visit, $419.70 (10.1%) for the ED visit, and $809.00 (13.8%) for the 30 days after the ED visit. For the 2,595 ED visits by those enrolled in Medicare Advantage, the weighted median total (and % out-of-pocket) costs were $484.92 (24.0%) for the 30 days prior to the ED visit, $216.66 (21.9%) for the ED visit, and $439.13 (22.4%) for the 30 days after the ED visit. CONCLUSION: Older adults insured by Medicare Advantage incur lower total health care costs and face similar overall out-of-pocket expenses in the time period surrounding emergency care. However, a higher proportion of expenses are out-of-pocket compared with those insured by traditional Medicare, providing evidence of greater cost sharing for Medicare Advantage plan enrollees.

Geriatric Emergency Medication Safety Recommendations (GEMS-Rx): Modified Delphi Development of a High-Risk Prescription List for Older Emergency Department Patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Half of emergency department (ED) patients aged 65 years and older are discharged with new prescriptions. Potentially inappropriate prescriptions contribute to adverse drug events. Our objective was to develop an evidence- and consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions to avoid among older ED patients. METHODS: We performed a modified, 3-round Delphi process that included 10 ED physician experts in geriatrics or quality measurement and 1 pharmacist. Consensus members reviewed all 35 medication categories from the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria and ranked each on a 5-point Likert scale (5=highest) for overall priority for avoidance (Round 1), risk of short-term adverse events and avoidability (Round 2), and reasonable medical indications for high-risk medication use (Round 3). RESULTS: For each round, questionnaire response rates were 91%, 82%, and 64%, respectively. After Round 1, benzodiazepines (mean, 4.60 [SD, 0.70]), skeletal muscle relaxants (4.60 [0.70]), barbiturates (4.30 [1.06]), first-generation antipsychotics (4.20 [0.63]) and first-generation antihistamines (3.70 [1.49]) were prioritized for avoidance. In Rounds 2 and 3, hypnotic "Z" drugs (4.29 [1.11]), metoclopramide (3.89 [0.93]), and sulfonylureas (4.14 [1.07]) were prioritized for avoidability, despite lower concern for short-term adverse events. All 8 medication classes were included in the final list. Reasonable indications for prescribing high-risk medications included seizure disorders, benzodiazepine/ethanol withdrawal, end of life, severe generalized anxiety, allergic reactions, gastroparesis, and prescription refill. CONCLUSION: We present the first expert consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions for older ED patients (GEMS-Rx) to improve safety among older ED patients.

An Outcome Comparison Between Geriatric and Nongeriatric Emergency Departments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe diagnosis rates and compare common process outcomes between geriatric emergency departments (EDs) and nongeriatric EDs participating in the American College of Emergency Physicians Clinical Emergency Data Registry (CEDR). METHODS: We conducted an observational study of ED visits in calendar year 2021 within the CEDR by older adults. The analytic sample included 6,444,110 visits at 38 geriatric EDs and 152 matched nongeriatric EDs, with the geriatric ED status determined based on linkage to the American College of Emergency Physicians' Geriatric ED Accreditation program. Stratified by age, we assessed diagnosis rates (X/1000) for 4 common geriatric syndrome conditions and a set of common process outcomes including the ED length of stay, discharge rates, and 72-hour revisit rates. RESULTS: Across all age categories, geriatric EDs had higher diagnosis rates than nongeriatric EDs for 3 of the 4 following geriatric syndrome conditions of interest: urinary tract infection, dementia, and delirium/altered mental status. The median ED site-level length of stay for older adults was lower at geriatric EDs compared with that at nongeriatric EDs, whereas 72-hour revisit rates were similar across all age categories. Geriatric EDs exhibited a median discharge rate of 67.5% for adults aged 65 to 74 years, 60.8% for adults aged 75 to 84 years, and 55.6% for adults aged >85 years. Comparatively, the median discharge rate at nongeriatric ED sites was 69.0% for adults aged 65 to 74 years, 64.2% for adults aged 75 to 84 years, and 61.3% for adults aged >85 years. CONCLUSION: Geriatric EDs had higher geriatric syndrome diagnosis rates, lower ED lengths of stay, and similar discharge and 72-hour revisit rates when compared with nongeriatric EDs in the CEDR. These findings provide the first benchmarks for emergency care process outcomes in geriatric EDs compared with nongeriatric EDs.

Reach and Adoption of a Geriatric Emergency Department Accreditation Program in the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to describe the reach and adoption of Geriatric Emergency Department Accreditation (GEDA) program and care processes instituted at accredited geriatric emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We analyzed a cross-section of a cohort of US EDs that received GEDA from May 2018 to March 2021. We obtained data from the American College of Emergency Physicians and publicly available sources. Data included GEDA level, geographic location, urban/rural designation, and care processes instituted. Frequencies and proportions and median and interquartile ranges were used to summarize categorical and continuous data, respectively. RESULTS: Over the study period, 225 US geriatric ED accreditations were issued and included in our analysis-14 Level 1, 21 Level 2, and 190 Level 3 geriatric EDs; 5 geriatric EDs reapplied and received higher-level accreditation after initial accreditation at a lower level. Only 9 geriatric EDs were in rural regions. There was significant heterogeneity in protocols enacted at geriatric EDs; minimizing urinary catheter use and fall prevention were the most common. CONCLUSION: There has been rapid growth in geriatric EDs, driven by Level 3 accreditation. Most geriatric EDs are in urban areas, indicating the potential need for expansion beyond these areas. Future research evaluating the impact of GEDA on health care utilization and patient-oriented outcomes is needed.

Geriatric emergency department revisits after discharge with Potentially Inappropriate Medications: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) prescribed in an academic emergency department (ED) are associated with increased ED revisits in older adults. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older, discharged from an academic ED (January 2012 - November 2015) with any PIMs versus no PIMs. PIMs were defined using Category 1 of the 2015 Updated Beers criteria. Primary outcomes, obtained from a Medicare database linked to hospital ED subjects, were ED revisits 3 and 30 days from index ED discharge. Adjusted multiple logistic regression was used with entropy balance weighted covariates: Age in years, Gender, Race, Number of discharge medications, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score, Emergency Severity Index scores (ESI), Chief Complaint, Medicaid status, and prior 90 Day ED visits. RESULTS: Over the study period, there were a total of 7,591 Medicare beneficiaries 65+ discharged from the ED with a prescription; 1,383 (18%) received one or more PIMs. ED revisits in 30 days were fewer for the PIMs cohort (12% PIMs vs 16% no PIMs, OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 - 0.95, P value <0.005). Hospital admissions in 30 days were fewer for the PIMs cohort (4 PIMs vs 7% no PIMs, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 - 1.00, P value <0.005). In addition to PIMs, covariate risk factors associated with ED revisits in 30 days included comorbidity severity, history of prior ED revisits, chief complaint, and Medicaid status. Risk factors associated with hospitalization in 30 days included those plus age and emergency severity index, but not race nor ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged from the ED receiving potentially inappropriate medications as defined by Category 1 of the 2015 updated Beers criteria had lower odds of revisiting the ED within 30 days of index visit. Sociodemographic factors such as gender and race did not predict ED revisits or hospital admissions. Clinical characteristics predicted ED revisits and hospital admissions, the strongest risk being increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index score followed by triage acuity and chief complaint. Future studies are needed to delineate the implications of our findings.

Research priorities for elder abuse screening and intervention: A Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research (GEAR) network scoping review and consensus statement.

The Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research (GEAR) Network (1) conducted a scoping review of the current literature on the identification of and interventions to address elder abuse among patients receiving care in emergency departments and (2) used this review to prioritize research questions for knowledge development. Two questions guided the scoping review: What is the effect of universal emergency department screening compared to targeted screening or usual practice on cases of elder abuse identified, safety outcomes, and health care utilization?; and What is the safety, health, legal, and psychosocial impact of emergency department-based interventions vs. usual care for patients experiencing elder abuse? We searched five article databases. Additional material was located through reference lists of identified publications, PsychInfo, and Google Scholar. The results were discussed in a consensus conference; and stakeholders voted to prioritize research questions. No studies were identified that directly addressed the first question regarding assessment strategies, but four instruments used for elder abuse screening in the emergency department were identified. For the second question, we located six articles on interventions for elder abuse in the emergency department; however, none directly addressed the question of comparative effectiveness. Based on these findings, GEAR participants identified five questions as priorities for future research - two related to screening, two related to intervention, and one encompassed both. In sum, research to identify best practices for elder abuse assessment and intervention in emergency departments is still needed. Although there are practical and ethical challenges, rigorous experimental studies are needed.

Concepts in Practice: Geriatric Emergency Departments.

In 2018, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) began accrediting facilities as "geriatric emergency departments" (EDs) according to adherence to the multiorganizational guidelines published in 2014. The guidelines were developed to help every ED improve its care of older adults. The geriatric ED guideline recommendations span the care continuum from out-of-hospital care, ED staffing, protocols, infrastructure, and transitions to outpatient care. Hospitals interested in making their EDs more geriatric friendly thus face the challenge of adopting, adapting, and implementing extensive guideline recommendations in a cost-effective manner and within the capabilities of their facilities and staff. Because all innovation is at heart local and must function within the constraints of local resources, different hospital systems have developed implementation processes for the geriatric ED guidelines according to their differing institutional capabilities and resources. This article describes 4 geriatric ED models of care to provide practical examples and guidance for institutions considering developing geriatric EDs: a geriatric ED-specific unit, geriatrics practitioner models, geriatric champions, and geriatric-focused observation units. The advantages and limitations of each model are compared and examples of specific institutions and their operational metrics are provided.

Sequential implementation of the EQUIPPED geriatric medication safety program as a learning health system.

OBJECTIVES: To present the three-site EQUIPPED academic health system research collaborative, which engaged in sequential implementation of the EQUIPPED medication safety program, as a learning health system; to understand how the organizations worked together to build resources for program scale-up. DESIGN: Following the Replicating Effective Programs framework, we analyzed content from implementation teams' focus groups, local and cross-site meeting minutes and sites' organizational profiles to develop an implementation package. SETTING: Three academic emergency departments that each implemented EQUIPPED over three successive years. PARTICIPANTS: Implementation team members at each site participating in focus groups (n = 18), local meetings during implementation years, and cross-site meetings during all years of the projects. INTERVENTION(S): EQUIPPED provides Emergency Department providers with clinical decision support (education, order sets, and feedback) to reduce prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications to adults aged 65 years and older who received a prescription at time of discharge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Implementation process components assembled through successive implementation. RESULTS: Each site had clinical and environmental characteristics to be addressed in implementing the EQUIPPED program. We identified 10 process elements and describe lessons for each. Lessons guided the compilation of the EQUIPPED intervention package or toolkit, including the EQUIPPED logic model. CONCLUSIONS: Our academic health system research collaborative addressing medication safety through sequential implementation is a learning health system that can serve as a model for other quality improvement projects with multiple sites. The network produced an implementation package that can be vetted, piloted, evaluated, and finalized for large-scale dissemination in community-based settings.

Bouncing Back Elsewhere: Multilevel Analysis of Return Visits to the Same or a Different Hospital After Initial Emergency Department Presentation.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Analyses of 72-hour emergency department (ED) return visits are frequently used for quality assurance purposes and have been proposed as a means of measuring provider performance. These analyses have traditionally examined only patients returning to the same hospital as the initial visit. We use a health information exchange network to describe differences between ED visits resulting in 72-hour revisits to the same hospital and those resulting in revisits to a different site. METHODS: We examined data from a 31-hospital health information exchange of all ED visits during a 5-year period to identify 72-hour return visits and collected available encounter, patient, and hospital variables. Next, we used multilevel analysis of encounter-level, patient-level, and hospital-level data to describe differences between initial ED visits resulting in different-site and same-site return visits. RESULTS: We identified 12,621,159 patient visits to the 31 study EDs, including 841,259 same-site and 107,713 different-site return visits within 72 hours of initial ED presentation. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the initial-visit characteristics' predictive relationship that any return visit would be at a different site: daytime visit (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.12), patient-hospital county concordance (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.44), male sex (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.30), aged 65 years or older (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.57), sites with an ED residency (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.43), sites at an academic hospital (OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.15), sites with high density of surrounding EDs (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.68 to 1.77), and sites with a high frequency of same-site return visits (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.11). CONCLUSION: This analysis describes how ED encounters with early revisits to the same hospital differ from those with revisits to a second hospital. These findings challenge the use of single-site return-visit frequency as a quality measure, and, more constructively, describe how hospitals can use health information exchange to more accurately identify early ED return visits and to support programs related to these revisits.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Emergency Department Pain Care Across Different Types of Fractures.

Objectives: To identify differences in emergency department (ED) pain-care based on the type of fracture sustained and to examine whether fracture type may influence the more aggressive analgesic use previously demonstrated in older patients. Design: Secondary analysis of retrospective cohort study. Setting: Five EDs (four academic, one community) in the United States. Participants: Patients (1,664) who presented in January, March, July, and October 2009 with a final diagnosis of fracture (774 long bone [LBF], 890 shorter bone [SBF]). Measurements: Primary-predictor was type of fracture (LBF vs. SBF). Pain-care process outcomes included likelihood of analgesic administration, opioid-dose, and time to first analgesic. General estimating equations were used to control for age, gender, race, baseline pain score, triage acuity, comorbidities and ED crowding. Subgroup analyses were conducted to analyze age-based differences in pain care by fracture type. Results: A larger proportion of patients with LBF (30%) were older (>65 years old) compared to SBF (13%). Compared with SBF, patients with LBF were associated with greater likelihood of analgesic-administration (OR = 2.03; 95 CI = 1.58 to 2.62; P < 0.001) and higher opioid-doses (parameter estimate = 0.268; 95 CI = 0.239 to 0.297; P < 0.001). When LBF were examined separately, older-patients had a trend to longer analgesic wait-times (99 [55-163] vs. 76 [35-149] minutes, P = 0.057), but no other differences in process outcomes were found. Conclusion: Long bone fractures were associated with more aggressive pain care than SBF. When fracture types were examined separately, older patients did not appear to receive more aggressive pain care. This difference should be accounted for in further research.

Improving geriatric prescribing in the ED: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers to clinical decision support tool use.

QUALITY PROBLEM OR ISSUE: Clinical decision support (CDS) may improve prescribing for older adults in the Emergency Department (ED) if adopted by providers. INITIAL ASSESSMENT: Existing prescribing order entry processes were mapped at an initial Veterans Administration Medical Center site, demonstrating cognitive burden, effort and safety concerns. CHOICE OF SOLUTION: Geriatric order sets incorporating 2012 Beers guidelines and including geriatric prescribing advice and prepopulated order options were developed. IMPLEMENTATION: Geriatric order sets were implemented at two sites as part of the multicomponent 'Enhancing Quality of Prescribing Practices for Older Veterans Discharged from the Emergency Department' quality improvement initiative. EVALUATION: Facilitators and barriers to order sets use at the two sites were evaluated. Phone interviews were conducted with two provider groups (n = 20), those 'EQUiPPED' with the interventions (n = 10, 5 at each site) and Comparison providers who were only exposed to order sets through a clickable option on the ED order menu within the patient's medical record (n = 10, 5 at each site). All providers were asked about order set 'use' and 'usefulness'. Users (n = 11) were asked about 'usability'. LESSONS LEARNED: Order set adopters described 'usefulness' in terms of 'safety' and 'efficiency', whereas order set consultants and order set non-users described 'usefulness' in terms of 'information' or 'training'. Provider 'autonomy', 'comfort' level with existing tools, and 'learning curve' were stated as barriers to use. CONCLUSIONS: Quantifying efficiency advantages and communicating safety benefit over preexisting practices and tools may improve adoption of CDS in ED and in other settings of care.

The effect of surgical consult in the treatment of abdominal pain in older adults in the ED.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine whether need for surgical consult contributes to delayed or reduced analgesic administration in older adults presenting to the emergency department with abdominal pain. METHODS: Secondary data analyses from a prospective cohort study consisting of adults ≥65 years in age presenting to the emergency department with a chief concern of abdominal pain from November 1, 2012, through October 31, 2014, were performed. Measurements included administration of analgesics, time to administration, type given, and pain score reduction. Covariates for adjusted analyses included age, sex, race/ethnicity, and Emergency Severity Index. RESULTS: A total of 3522 patients were included, of which 281 (8.7%) received any consult. Consult patients were less likely to receive any analgesic medication (53.0%) compared with nonconsult patients (62.5%) (relative risk = 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.91). However, among those patients receiving analgesic medications, there were no differences in likelihood of receiving an opioid, time to administration, or pain score reduction. When analyzing patients who received a surgical consult (n = 154, 4.4%), these associations were notably stronger. Surgical consult patients had a lower rate of analgesic administration (46.8%) compared with nonconsult patients (62.4%) (relative risk = 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.63- 0.89). Again, no differences were found in likelihood of receiving any opioid, time to administration, or pain score reduction. CONCLUSION: Need for abdominal surgical consult is associated with decreased administration of analgesics in older patients, possibly indicating a continued need to improve management in this setting. This difference, however, did not impact pain score reductions.

Ultrasound-guided nerve blocks for intracapsular and extracapsular hip fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To compare pain relief between patients with intracapsular and extracapsular hip fractures who received an ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block (USFNB). DESIGN: A multicenter, prospective, randomized, clinical trial. SETTING: The study was conducted in the emergency departments of 3 academic hospitals located in New York City. SUBJECTS: Patients aged ≥60 years presenting to the emergency department with hip fracture. METHODS: A subgroup analysis from a larger data set was conducted of patients with intracapsular and extracapsular hip fractures who received an USFNB. We compared pain scores at baseline and then at 2 and 3 hours after the nerve block was performed, and also assessed pain relief at 2 and 3 hours. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were randomized to receive USFNB, of which 68 had follow-up data at 2 and 3 hours and were included in the data analysis. Thirty-one were diagnosed with intracapsular and 37 with extracapsular hip fractures. In both groups, reductions in pain scores were clinically and statistically significant. In the intracapsular group, mean pain scores decreased from 6.23 to 3.81 (P < .0001) at 2 hours and from 6.23 to 3.87 (P < .0001) at 3 hours. In the extracapsular group, mean pain scores decreased from 6.62 to 3.89 (P < .0001) at 2 hours and from 6.62 to 3.46 (P < .0001) at 3 hours. These differences were similar between the extracapsular and intracapsular groups at 2 hours (P = .92) and at 3 hours (P = .58), thus demonstrating similar reductions in pain in the 2 groups. The differences in pain relief between the intracapsular and extracapsular groups were also similar: 1.61 (confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.08) vs 1.35 (CI, 0.96-1.75) at 2 hours (P = .39) and 1.68 (CI, 1.21-2.15) vs 1.38 (CI, 0.89-1.87) at 3 hours (P = .38). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block was equally effective in reducing pain for patients with both intracapsular and extracapsular hip fractures.

Feasibility of nurses measuring gait speed in older community-dwelling Emergency Department patients.

Gait speed assessment is a rapid, simple and objective measure for predicting risk of unfavorable outcomes which may provide better prognostic and reliable information than existing geriatric ED (Emergency Department) screening tools. This descriptive pilot project was designed to determine feasibility of implementing gait speed screening into routine nursing practice by objectively identifying patients with sub-optimal gait speeds. Participants included community-dwelling adults 65 years and older with plans for discharge following ED treatment. Patients with a gait speed <1.0 m/s were identified as "high-risk" for an adverse event, and referred to the ED social worker for individualized resources prior to discharge. Thirty-five patients were screened and nurse initiated gait speed screens were completed 60% of the time. This project demonstrates ED gait speed screening may be feasible. Implications for practice should consider incorporating gait speed screening into routine nursing assessment to improve provider ED decision-making and disposition planning.

A Multicenter Evaluation of the Impact of Sex on Abdominal and Fracture Pain Care.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies examining sex-based disparities in emergency department (ED) pain care have been limited to a single pain condition, a single study site, and lack rigorous control for confounders. OBJECTIVE: A multicenter evaluation of the effect of sex on abdominal pain (AP) and fracture pain (FP) care outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN: A retrospective cohort review of ED visits at 5 US hospitals in January, April, July, and October 2009. SUBJECTS: A total of 6931 patients with a final ED diagnosis of FP (n=1682) or AP (n=5249) were included. MEASURES: The primary predictor was sex. The primary outcome was time to analgesic administration. Secondary outcomes included time to medication order, and the likelihood of receiving an analgesic and change in pain scores 360 minutes after triage: Multivariable models, clustered by study site, were conducted to adjust for race, age, comorbidities, initial pain score, ED crowding, and triage acuity. RESULTS: On adjusted analyses, compared with men, women with AP waited longer for analgesic administration [AP women: 112 (65-187) minutes, men: 96 (52-167) minutes, P<0.001] and ordering [women: 84 (41-160) minutes, men: 71 (32-137) minutes, P<0.001], whereas women with FP did not (Administration: P=0.360; Order: P=0.133). Compared with men, women with AP were less likely to receive analgesics in the first 90 minutes (OR=0.766; 95% CI, 0.670-0.875; P<0.001), whereas women with FP were not (P=0.357). DISCUSSION: In this multicenter study, we found that women experienced delays in analgesic administration for AP, but not for FP. Future research and interventions to decrease sex disparities in pain care should take type of pain into account.

The Evolving Role of Geriatric Emergency Department Social Work in the Era of Health Care Reform.

In the era of Medicaid Redesign and the Affordable Care Act, the emergency department (ED) presents major opportunities for social workers to assume a leading role in the delivery of care. Through GEDI WISE-Geriatric Emergency Department Innovations in care through Workforce, Informatics and Structural Enhancements,-a unique multidisciplinary partnership made possible by an award from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, social workers in The Mount Sinai ED have successfully contributed to improvements in health outcomes and transitions for older adults receiving emergency care. This article will describe the pivotal and highly valued role of the ED social worker in contributing to the multidisciplinary accomplishments of GEDI WISE objectives in this new model of care.

Automating risk stratification for geriatric syndromes in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric emergency department (GED) guidelines endorse screening older patients for geriatric syndromes in the ED, but there have been significant barriers to widespread implementation. The majority of screening programs require engagement of a clinician, nurse, or social worker, adding to already significant workloads at a time of record-breaking ED patient volumes, staff shortages, and hospital boarding crises. Automated, electronic health record (EHR)-embedded risk stratification approaches may be an alternate solution for extending the reach of the GED mission by directing human actions to a smaller subset of higher risk patients. METHODS: We define the concept of automated risk stratification and screening using existing EHR data. We discuss progress made in three potential use cases in the ED: falls, cognitive impairment, and end-of-life and palliative care, emphasizing the importance of linking automated screening with systems of healthcare delivery. RESULTS: Research progress and operational deployment vary by use case, ranging from deployed solutions in falls screening to algorithmic validation in cognitive impairment and end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: Automated risk stratification offers a potential solution to one of the most pressing problems in geriatric emergency care: identifying high-risk populations of older adults most appropriate for specific GED care. Future work is needed to realize the promise of improved care with less provider burden by creating tools suitable for widespread deployment as well as best practices for their implementation and governance.

End-of-life emergency department use and healthcare expenditures among older adults: A nationally representative study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) visits at end-of-life may cause financial strain and serve as a marker of inadequate access to community services and health care. We sought to examine end-of-life ED use, total healthcare spending, and out-of-pocket spending in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: Using Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data, we conducted a pooled cross-sectional analysis of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65+ years with a date of death between July 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Our primary outcomes were ED visits, total healthcare spending, and out-of-pocket spending in the 7, 30, 90, and 180 days preceding death. We estimated a series of zero-inflated negative binomial models identifying patient characteristics associated with the primary outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3812 older adult decedents, 610 (16%), 1207 (31.7%), 1582 (41.5%), and 1787 (46.9%) Medicare beneficiaries had ED visits in the final 7, 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively, of life. For Medicare beneficiaries with at least one ED visit in the final 30 days of life, the median total and out-of-pocket costs were, respectively, $12,500 and $308, compared, respectively, with $278 and $94 for those without any ED visits (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Having a diagnosis of dementia (odds ratio [OR] 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.99; p = 0.04) and being on hospice status during the year of death (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.48-0.66; p = <0.001) were associated with a decreased likelihood of having an ED visit. Having dementia was associated with a decreased likelihood of having any healthcare spending (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.71; p = 0.001) and any out-of-pocket spending (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36-0.72; p = <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: One in three older adults visit the ED in the last month of life, and approximately one in two utilize ED services in the last half-year of life, with evidence of associated considerable total and out-of-pocket spending.