2017 AAAEM Benchmarking Survey: Comparing Pediatric and Adult Academic Emergency Departments.

OBJECTIVES: The Academy of Administrators in Academic Emergency Medicine Benchmark Survey of academic emergency departments (EDs) was conducted in 2017. We compared operational measures between pediatric and adult (defined as fewer than 5% pediatric visits) EDs based on survey data. Emergency departments in dedicated pediatric hospitals were not represented. METHODS: Measures included: (1) patient volumes, length of stay, and acuity; and 2) faculty staffing, productivity, and percent effort in academics. t Tests were used to compare continuous measures and inferences for categorical variables were made using Pearson χ2 test. RESULTS: The analysis included 17 pediatric and 52 adult EDs. We found a difference in the number of annual visits between adult (median, 66,275; interquartile range [IQR], 56,184-77,702) and pediatric EDs (median, 25,416; IQR, 19,840-29,349) (P < 0.0001). Mean "arrivals per faculty clinical hour" and "total arrivals per treatment space" showed no differences. The proportion of visits (1) arriving by emergency medical services and (2) for behavioral health were significantly higher in adult EDs (both P < 0.0001). The mean length of stay in hours for "all" patients was significantly longer in adult (5.4; IQR, 5.0-6.6) than in pediatric EDs (3.5; IQR, 2.9-4.3; P = 0.017). A similar difference was found for "discharged" patients (P = 0.004). Emergency severity indices, professional evaluation and management codes, and hospitalization rates all suggest higher acuity in adult EDs (all P < 0.0001). There were no differences in mean work relative value units per patient or in the distribution of full time equivalent effort dedicated to academics. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, significant differences in operational measures exist between academic adult and pediatric EDs. No differences were found when considering per unit measures, such as arrivals per faculty clinical hour or per treatment space.

Advance Care Planning for Emergency Department Patients With COVID-19 Infection: An Assessment of a Physician Training Program.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has heightened the importance of advance care planning (ACP), particularly in the emergency department (ED). The objective of this study was to determine the effect of an educational program for emergency physicians on ACP conversations in the ED during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: This was an observational pre-/post-interventional study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a Southeastern U.S. academic ED. PARTICIPANTS: 143 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection in the 2 weeks up to and including the ED encounter of interest (between March 26 and May 25, 2020) were included. INTERVENTIONS: The primary intervention was an ACP training toolkit with three components: (1) an evidence-based guide to COVID-19 risk stratification, (2) education on language to initiate ACP conversations, and (3) modification of the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate ACP documentation. Palliative care physicians also delivered a 60-minute ACP educational session for emergency medicine physicians. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of ACP activities including: (1) identification of a healthcare decision-maker (HCDM), (2) an order for a code status, or (3) a documented goals of care conversation. RESULTS: There was a 25.4% (95% CI: 7.0-43.9) increase in the composite outcome of ED-based ACP. After adjustment for patient demographics and triage score, there was a non-statistically significant increase in ACP activity (OR = 2.71, 95% CI: 0.93-8.64; P = .08). CONCLUSION: A rapid and simple physician-facing educational intervention demonstrated a trend, though lacking in statistical significance, towards increased ED-based ACP activities for patients with COVID-19.