Implementation of delirium screening in the emergency department: A qualitative study with early adopters.

INTRODUCTION: Delirium affects 15% of older adults presenting to emergency departments (EDs) but is detected in only one-third of cases. Evidence-based guidelines for ED delirium screening exist, but are underutilized. Frontline staff perceptions about delirium and time and resource constraints are known barriers to ED delirium screening uptake. Early adopters of ED delirium screening can offer valuable lessons about successful implementation. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinician-administrators leading ED delirium screening initiatives from 20 EDs in the United States and Canada. Interviews focused on experiences of planning and implementing ED delirium screening. Interviews lasted 15 to 50 minutes and were digitally recorded and transcribed. To identify factors that commonly impacted implementation of ED delirium screening, we used constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), an Implementation Science framework widely used to evaluate healthcare improvement initiatives. RESULTS: Overall, notable facilitators of successful implementation were having institutional and ED leadership support and designated clinical champions to longitudinally engage and educate frontline staff. We found specific examples of factors affecting implementation drawn from the following seven CFIR constructs: (1) intervention complexity, (2) intervention adaptability, (3) external policies and incentives, (4) peer pressure from other institutions, (5) the implementation climate of the ED, (6) staff knowledge and beliefs, and (7) engaging deliverers of intervention, that is, frontline ED staff. CONCLUSION: Implementing ED delirium screening is complex and requires institutional resources as well as clinical champions to engage frontline staff in a sustained fashion.

A scoping review of geriatric emergency medicine research transparency in diversity, equity, and inclusion reporting.

INTRODUCTION: The intersection of ageism and racism is underexplored in geriatric emergency medicine (GEM) research. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of research published between January 2016 and December 2021. We included original emergency department-based research focused on falls, delirium/dementia, medication safety, and elder abuse. We excluded manuscripts that did not include (1) original research data pertaining to the four core topics, (2) older adults, (3) subjects from the United States, and (4) for which full text publication could not be obtained. The primary objective was to qualitatively describe reporting about older adults' social identities in GEM research. Secondary objectives were to describe (1) the extent of inclusion of minoritized older adults in GEM research, (2) GEM research about health equity, and (3) feasible approaches to improve the status quo of GEM research reporting. RESULTS: After duplicates were removed, 3277 citations remained and 883 full-text articles were reviewed, of which 222 met inclusion criteria. Four findings emerged. First, race and ethnicity reporting was inconsistent. Second, research rarely provided a rationale for an age threshold used to define geriatric patients. Third, GEM research more commonly reported sex than gender. Fourth, research commonly excluded older adults with cognitive impairment and speakers of non-English primary languages. CONCLUSION: Meaningful assessment of GEM research inclusivity is limited by inconsistent reporting of sociodemographic characteristics, specifically race and ethnicity. Reporting of sociodemographic characteristics should be standardized across different study designs. Strategies are needed to include in GEM research older adults with cognitive impairment and non-English primary languages.

Emergency department communication with diverse caregivers and persons living with dementia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Research to date has detailed numerous challenges in emergency department (ED) communication with persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their caregivers. However, little is known about communication experiences of individuals belonging to minoritized racial and ethnic groups, who are disproportionately impacted by dementia and less likely to be included in dementia research. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 29 caregivers of PLWD from two urban academic hospital EDs with distinct patient populations. The first site is an ED in the Northeast serving a majority White, English-speaking, and insured population. The second site is an ED in the South serving a majority Black and/or Hispanic, Spanish-speaking, and underinsured population. Interviews lasted an average of 25 min and were digitally recorded and transcribed. We used an inductive approach to analyze interview transcripts for dominant themes and compared themes between sites. RESULTS: Our sample included caregivers of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. Caregivers cared for PLWD who spoke English, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, and Vietnamese. We identified three themes. First, caregiver advocacy was central to experiences of ED communication, particularly when PLWD primarily spoke a non-English language. Second, routine care plans did not address what mattered most to participants and PLWD. Participants felt that care arose from protocols and did not address what mattered most to them. Third, White English-speaking caregivers in Site 1 more commonly expected ED staff to engage them in care decision-making than Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Middle Eastern caregivers in Site 2. CONCLUSION: Language barriers amplify the higher intensity care needed by PLWD in the ED. Strategies should be developed for communicating with PLWD and caregivers about what matters most in their ED care.

The differences in code status conversation approaches reported by emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians: A mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: During acute health deterioration, emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians routinely discuss code status (e.g., shared decision making about mechanical ventilation) with seriously ill patients. Little is known about their approaches. We sought to elucidate how code status conversations are conducted by emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians and why their approaches are different. METHODS: We conducted a sequential-explanatory, mixed-method study in three large academic medical centers in the Northeastern United States. Attending physicians and advanced practice providers working in emergency medicine and palliative care were eligible. Among the survey respondents, we purposefully sampled the participants for follow-up interviews. We collected clinicians' self-reported approaches in code status conversations and their rationales. A survey with a 5-point Likert scale ("very unlikely" to "very likely") was used to assess the likelihood of asking about medical procedures (procedure based) and patients' values (value based) during code status conversations, followed by semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Among 272 clinicians approached, 206 completed the survey (a 76% response rate). The reported approaches differed greatly (e.g., 91% of palliative care clinicians reported asking about a patient's acceptable quality of life compared to 59% of emergency medicine clinicians). Of the 206 respondents, 118 (57%) agreed to subsequent interviews; our final number of semistructured interviews included seven emergency medicine clinicians and nine palliative care clinicians. The palliative care clinicians stated that the value-based questions offer insight into patients' goals, which is necessary for formulating a recommendation. In contrast, emergency medicine clinicians stated that while value-based questions are useful, they are vague and necessitate extended discussions, which are inappropriate during emergencies. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians reported conducting code status conversations differently. The rationales may be shaped by their clinical practices and experiences.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Considerations in the Geriatric Emergency Department Patient.

This article introduces core topics in health equity scholarship and provides examples of how diversity, equity, and inclusion impact the aging population and emergency care of older adults. It offers strategies for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion to both strengthen the patient-clinician therapeutic relationship and to address operations and systems that impact care of the geriatric emergency department patient.

The development of an educational workshop to reframe and manage professional conflict via a sex and gender lens.

Background: Conflict is inevitable in the emergency department, and conflict resolution is an essential skill for emergency providers to master. Effective conflict management can optimize patient care and enhance professional satisfaction. To communicate effectively in high-stress, high-impact situations, sex- and gender-based differences need to be considered. Methods: Nine resident, fellow, junior, and senior faculty members of the Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine collaborated to design a 4-h workshop. The focus was on professional communication and conflict resolution in emergency medicine (EM), with special attention on how sex and gender can influence these processes. Results: The final educational workshop utilized a variety of formats focused on communication and effective conflict resolution including: traditional didactics, facilitated small groups with case-based learning, expert panel discussion, and an experiential learning session. The consideration of how sex- and gender-associated factors might contribute additional complexity or challenges to conflictual interactions were interwoven into each session to highlight alternative vantage points. Conclusions: Effective conflict resolution is an important skill for success in EM. We developed a workshop that went beyond typical communication-based programming to consider how sex- and gender-related factors influence communication and conflict resolution.

Leveraging the Electronic Health Record to Implement Emergency Department Delirium Screening.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand how emergency departments (EDs) use health information technology (HIT), and specifically the electronic health record (EHR), to support implementation of delirium screening. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 ED clinician-administrators, representing 20 EDs, about how they used HIT resources to implement delirium screening. Interviews focused on challenges participants experienced when implementing ED delirium screening and EHR-based strategies they used to overcome them. We coded interview transcripts using dimensions from the Singh and Sittig sociotechnical model, which addresses use of HIT in complex adaptive health care systems. Subsequently, we analyzed data for common themes across dimensions of the sociotechnical model. RESULTS: Three themes emerged about how the EHR could be used to address challenges in implementation of delirium screening: (1) staff adherence to screening, (2) communication among ED team members about a positive screen, and (3) linking positive screening to delirium management. Participants described several HIT-based strategies including visual nudges, icons, hard stop alerts, order sets, and automated communications that facilitated implementation of delirium screening. An additional theme emerged about challenges related to the availability of HIT resources. CONCLUSION: Our findings provide practical HIT-based strategies for health care institutions planning to adopt geriatric screenings. Building delirium screening tools and reminders to perform screening into the EHR may prompt adherence to screening. Automating related workflows, team communication, and management of patients who screen positive for delirium may help save staff members' time. Staff education, engagement, and access to HIT resources may support successful screening implementation.

Race, racism, and antiracism in emergency medicine: A scoping review of the literature and research agenda for the future.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to conduct a scoping review of the literature and develop consensus-derived research priorities for future research inquiry in an effort to (1) identify and summarize existing research related to race, racism, and antiracism in emergency medicine (EM) and adjacent fields and (2) set the agenda for EM research in these topic areas. METHODS: A scoping review of the literature using PubMed and EMBASE databases, as well as review of citations from included articles, formed the basis for discussions with community stakeholders, who in turn helped to inform and shape the discussion and recommendations of participants in the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) consensus conference. Through electronic surveys and two virtual meetings held in April 2021, consensus was reached on terminology, language, and priority research questions, which were rated on importance or impact (highest, medium, lower) and feasibility or ease of answering (easiest, moderate, difficult). RESULTS: A total of 344 articles were identified through the literature search, of which 187 met inclusion criteria; an additional 34 were identified through citation review. Findings of racial inequities in EM and related fields were grouped in 28 topic areas, from which emerged 44 key research questions. A dearth of evidence for interventions to address manifestations of racism in EM was noted throughout. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of racism in EM emerged in nearly every facet of our literature. Key research priorities identified through consensus processes provide a roadmap for addressing and eliminating racism and other systems of oppression in EM.

Barriers and facilitators to pediatric telehealth use in English- and Spanish-speaking families: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid increase in telehealth use during the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns have been raised about the potential for exacerbating existing healthcare disparities in marginalized populations. While eliminating barriers such as transportation and time constraints, telehealth may introduce barriers related to technology access. With little known about the patient experience accessing telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study seeks to understand the barriers and facilitators to telehealth use as well as interventions that may address them. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with parents of pediatric patients of a primary care clinic in a diverse community during the study period of March-May 2021. The interviews explored barriers and facilitators to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were balanced across language (Spanish and English) as well as across visit type (in-person vs. telehealth). Recruitment, collection of demographic information, and interviews were conducted by telephone. The conversations were recorded and transcribed. Once thematic saturation was achieved, the data were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Of the 33 participants, 17 (52%) spoke English and 16 (48%) spoke Spanish. A total of 17 (52%) had experienced a telehealth encounter as their first visit during the study period while 16 (48%) had an in-person visit. Five themes were identified: (1) a recognition of differences in technological knowledge and access, (2) situational preferences for telehealth versus in-person visits, (3) avoidance of COVID-19 exposure, (4) convenience, and (5) change over time. English-speaking patients expressed greater ease with and a preference for telehealth, while Spanish-speaking participants expressed more technological difficulty with telehealth and a preference for in-person visits. Suggested interventions included informational tutorials such as videos before the visit, technical support, and providing families with technological devices. CONCLUSION: In this study, we examined patient and family perspectives on pediatric telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Implementation of the suggested interventions to address barriers to telehealth use is essential to prevent further exacerbation of health disparities already experienced by marginalized populations.

COVID-19 hospital and emergency department visitor policies in the United States: Impact on persons with cognitive or physical impairment or receiving end-of-life care.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the national distribution of COVID-19 hospital and emergency department visitor restriction policies across the United States, focusing on patients with cognitive or physical impairment or receiving end-of-life care. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of visitor policies and exceptions, using a nationally representative random sample of EDs and hospitals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, by trained study investigators using standardized instrument. RESULTS: Of the 352 hospitals studied, 326 (93%) had a COVID-19 hospital-wide visitor restriction policy and 164 (47%) also had an ED-specific policy. Hospital-wide policies were more prevalent at academic than non-academic (96% vs 90%; P < 0.05) and at urban than rural sites (95% vs 84%; P < 0.001); however, the prevalence of ED-specific policies did not significantly differ across these site characteristics. Geographic region was not associated with the prevalence of any visitor policies. Among all study sites, only 58% of hospitals reported exceptions for patients receiving end-of-life care, 39% for persons with cognitive impairment, and 33% for persons with physical impairment, and only 12% provided policies in non-English languages. Sites with ED-specific policies reported even fewer exceptions for patients with cognitive impairment (29%), with physical impairments (24%), or receiving end-of-life care (26%). CONCLUSION: Although the benefits of visitor policies towards curbing COVID-19 transmission had not been firmly established, such policies were widespread among US hospitals. Exceptions that permitted family or other caregivers for patients with cognitive or physical impairments or receiving end-of-life care were predominantly lacking, as were policies in non-English languages.

Evaluating older adults with cognitive dysfunction: A qualitative study with emergency clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Evaluating older adults with cognitive dysfunction in emergency departments (EDs) requires obtaining collateral information from sources other than the patient. Understanding the challenges emergency clinicians face in obtaining collateral information can inform development of interventions to improve geriatric emergency care and, more specifically, detection of ED delirium. The objective was to understand emergency clinicians' experiences obtaining collateral information on older adults with cognitive dysfunction, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: From February to May 2021, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 22 emergency physicians and advanced practice providers from two urban academic hospitals and one community hospital in the Northeast United States. Interviews lasted 10-20 min and were digitally recorded and transcribed. Interview transcripts were analyzed for dominant themes using a combined deductive-inductive approach. Responses regarding experiences before and during the pandemic were compared. RESULTS: Five major challenges emerged regarding (1) availability of caregivers, (2) reliability of sources, (3) language barriers, (4) time constraints, and (5) incomplete transfer documentation. Participants perceived all challenges, but those relating to transfer documentation were amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Emergency clinicians' perspectives can inform efforts to support caregiver presence at bedside and develop standardized communication tools to improve recognition of delirium and, more broadly, geriatric emergency care.

The Role of Gender in Nurse-Resident Interactions: A Mixed-methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: The role of gender in interprofessional interactions is poorly understood. This mixed-methods study explored perceptions of gender bias in interactions between emergency medicine (EM) residents and nurses. METHODS: We analyzed qualitative interviews and focus groups with residents and nurses from two hospitals for dominant themes. An electronic survey, developed through an inductive-deductive approach informed by qualitative data, was administered to EM residents and nurses. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and between-group comparisons. RESULTS: Six nurses and 14 residents participated in interviews and focus groups. Key qualitative themes included gender differences in interprofessional communication, specific examples of, and responses to, gender bias. Female nurses perceived female residents as more approachable and collaborative than male residents, while female residents perceived nurses' questions as doubting their clinical judgment. A total of 134 individuals (32%) completed the survey. Females more frequently perceived interprofessional gender bias (mean 30.9; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 25.6, 36.2; vs 17.6 [95% CI, 10.3, 24.9). Residents reported witnessing interprofessional gender bias more frequently than nurses (58.7 (95% CI, 48.6, 68.7 vs 23.9 (95% CI, 19.4, 28.4). Residents reported that gender bias affected job satisfaction (P = 0.002), patient care (P = 0.001), wellness (P = 0.003), burnout (P = 0.002), and self-doubt (P = 0.017) more frequently than nurses. CONCLUSION: Perceived interprofessional gender bias negatively impacts personal wellbeing and workplace satisfaction, particularly among female residents. Key institutional stakeholders including residency, nursing, and hospital leadership should invest the resources necessary to develop and integrate evidence-based strategies to improve interprofessional relationships that will ultimately enhance residency training, work climate, and patient care.