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.

When practice and policy conflict: blood cultures in community-acquired pneumonia.

Optimal evidence-based management of patients with uncomplicated community-acquired pneumonia in the emergency department (ED) setting remains a topic of discussion. This discussion was recently revitalized by a 2014 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine by Makam et al showing an increase in the use of blood cultures for patients with community-acquired pneumonia during ED visits from 29.4% of patients in 2002 to 51.1% in 2010. As the authors acknowledge, one of the most likely explanations could be the former pneumonia core measures required by the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services and the Joint Commission, potentially encouraging both ED and inpatient providers to reflexively order cultures. As these measures were the subject of fierce debate in the emergency medicine literature almost a decade ago, with recent policy changes affecting practicing clinicians, we aimed to briefly revisit the developments and concerning guidelines and discuss some important potentials for research in this setting.

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.

Improving Communication Between the Emergency Department and Radiology Department With a Novel Web-Based Tool in an Urban Academic Center.

DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM: Streamlining communication between radiology and referring services is vital to ensure appropriate care with minimal delays. Increased subspecialization has led to compartmentalization of the radiology department with many physicians working in disparate areas. At our hospital, we anecdotally noted that a significant portion of incoming phone calls were misdirected to the wrong workstations. This resulted in wasted time, unnecessary interruptions, and delays in care because the referring clinicians could not efficiently navigate the radiology department staffing structure. Our quality improvement project involved developing a web-based tool allowing the emergency department (ED) to more efficiently contact the appropriate radiology desk and reduce misdirected phone calls. INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH EMPLOYED TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM: Surveys were sent to radiology residents and ED providers (attendings, residents, physician assistants) to assess how often phone calls were misdirected to the wrong radiology station. Radiology residents were asked which stations received the most misdirected phone calls, and what station the caller was often looking for. ED providers were asked which stations they intended when they were told they called the wrong station, and a series of questions in the survey assessed their knowledge of commonly called radiology station (Plain Film, CT Body, Ultrasound, Neuoradiology, Pediatrics, and Overnight Desk). ED and radiology physicians worked together to design a simple, easily accessed web-based tool that allowed the ED clinicians to determine which station should be called during for each hour of the day, which integrated differences in staffing by radiology throughout the day. After the tool had been implemented for 8 months, surveys were again sent to radiology residents and ED clinicians asking the same questions as before to assess for any significant change in response. Additional questions were added to the ED survey to assess awareness of the new tool. DESCRIPTION OF OUTCOMES IN CHANGE OF PRACTICE: An interactive, easily updated schedule with optimal contact numbers was made available through the ED intranet. The design allowed for easy modification of contact numbers over time to accommodate changes in coverage location or staffing models. Prior to implementation contact information was presented on a static screen, which was unable to be changed and included multiple incorrect and defunct numbers. Additionally, contact defaulted to a general radiology pager, which was carried by a resident only responsible for plain films for most of the day. Numbers included in the new intranet tool were all pertinent reading room stations, all scheduling desks, and all technologist workspaces. Different schedules were provided for weekdays and weekends. Initial survey results showed that prior to the intervention, 74% of radiology residents said they received misdirected phone calls at least twice a day, and 57.9% of ED respondents reached the wrong recipient at least once per day. Frequencies of misdirected calls dropped to 58.4% of radiology residents (P = 0.37) and 17.9% of ED respondents (P < 0.01) on follow-up surveys 8 months after the tool was established. After establishing the new tool, 82.1% of ED respondents were aware of the new intranet contact tool and were using it to contact radiology. On the series of questions assessing ED respondents' knowledge of radiology numbers, over 50% of respondents knew the correct answer or answered using the call sheet after implementation; this resulted in statistically significant increases in accuracy for Body, Neuroradiology, and Pediatric radiology stations. Furthermore, with the exception of ED plain films, there was a statistically significant reduction in number of responses who said the general radiology pager should be called for reads. Fifty percent of radiology residents believed there was a reduction in the number of misdirected phone calls from the ED with this tool. CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS, AND DESCRIPTIONS OF FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Our tool was successful in accomplishing multiple goals. First, over 80% of ED respondents adopted the new tool. Second, the number of misdirected phone calls based on the subjective perception of ED respondents and radiology residents was reduced. Third, we objectively improved the ED respondents' behavior pattern in contacting the radiology department by either calling the correct number using the call tool, and by reducing the number of respondents who use the pager. Going forward, we hope to be able to expand use of this tool throughout the hospital in order to provide more timely and efficient care with other services by streamlining access between referring services and the appropriate radiology recipients.

Exception From Informed Consent: How IRB Reviewers Assess Community Consultation and Public Disclosure.

Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) regulations detail specific circumstances in which Institutional Review Boards (IRB) can approve studies where obtaining informed consent is not possible prior to subject enrollment. To better understand how IRB members evaluate community consultation (CC) and public disclosure (PD) processes and results, semi-structured interviews of EFIC-experienced IRB members were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. Interviews with 11 IRB members revealed similar approaches to reviewing EFIC studies. Most use summaries of CC activities to determine community members' attitudes; none reported using specific criteria nor recalled any CC reviews that resulted in modifications to or denials of EFIC studies. Most interviewees thought metrics based on Community VOICES's domains (feasibility, participant selection, quality of communication, community perceptions, investigator/IRB perceptions) would be helpful. IRB members had similar experiences and concerns about reviewing EFIC studies. Development of metrics to assess CC processes may be useful to IRBs reviewing EFIC studies.

Early prescribing outcomes after exporting the EQUIPPED medication safety improvement programme.

Enhancing quality of prescribing practices for older adults discharged from the Emergency Department (EQUIPPED) aims to reduce the monthly proportion of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescribed to older adults discharged from the ED to 5% or less. We describe prescribing outcomes at three academic health systems adapting and sequentially implementing the EQUIPPED medication safety programme.EQUIPPED was adapted from a model developed in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and sequentially implemented in one academic health system per year over a 3-year period. The monthly proportion of PIMs, as defined by the 2015 American Geriatrics Beers Criteria, of all medications prescribed to adults aged 65 years and older at discharge was assessed for 6 months preimplementation until 12 months postimplementation using a generalised linear time series model with a Poisson distribution.The EQUIPPED programme was translated from the VA health system and its electronic medical record into three health systems each using a version of the Epic electronic medical record. Adaptation occurred through local modification of order sets and in the generation and delivery of provider prescribing reports by local champions. Baseline monthly PIM proportions 6 months prior to implementation at the three sites were 5.6% (95% CI 5.0% to 6.3%), 5.8% (95% CI 5.0% to 6.6%) and 7.3% (95% CI 6.4% to 9.2%), respectively. Evaluation of monthly prescribing including the twelve months post-EQUIPPED implementation demonstrated significant reduction in PIMs at one of the three sites. In exploratory analyses, the proportion of benzodiazepine prescriptions decreased across all sites from approximately 17% of PIMs at baseline to 9.5%-12% postimplementation, although not all reached statistical significance.EQUIPPED is feasible to implement outside the VA system. While the impact of the EQUIPPED model may vary across different health systems, results from this initial translation suggest significant reduction in specific high-risk drug classes may be an appropriate target for improvement at sites with relatively low baseline PIM prescribing rates.

Unstable angina and non-ST-segment myocardial infarction: an evidence-based approach to management.

Unstable angina (UA) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) represent two common, closely related acute coronary syndromes with potentially high morbidity and mortality. Integration of information from the history, physical exam, electrocardiogram, and cardiac biomarkers is used to formulate both the diagnosis of UA/NSTEMI and the overall assessment of patient prognosis and risk. Early diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with UA/NSTEMI enable the physician to initiate timely, appropriate treatment. (There is strong clinical evidence supporting the tailoring of specific therapies to the risk profile of the patient.) In recent years, powerful new medical and invasive therapies have been developed. Pharmaceutical agents for UA/NSTEMI may be broadly grouped into one of three categories: anti-ischemic, anti-platelet, and anti-thrombotic agents. Standard therapy for UA/NSTEMI has commonly included oxygen, aspirin, nitrates, morphine, beta-blockers and heparin. Potent new anti-platelet agents, including inhibitors of platelet adenosine diphosphate and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors, play important, expanding roles in the management of these syndromes. Low-molecular-weight heparins have been shown to be an effective alternative to unfractionated heparin in their treatment. Major advances in invasive techniques and devices over the last decade include revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting intracoronary stents. Strong interest exists in studying the potential benefits and risks associated with an early invasive therapeutic strategy rather than an aggressive medical regimen for patients with UA/NSTEMI. As new treatments are rapidly added to our growing arsenal of management options, clinicians are constantly challenged with incorporating complex new information and guidelines into their practices in a timely fashion. To assist clinicians with this challenge, this article will review the evidence to support the use of current therapeutic options for UA/NSTEMI, with an emphasis on summarizing the most recent clinical guidelines jointly published by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association.

The evaluation and management of the acutely agitated elderly patient.

Delirium is an organic mental syndrome defined by a global disturbance in consciousness and cognition, which develops abruptly and often fluctuates over the course of the day. It is precipitated by medical illness, substance intoxication/withdrawal or medication effect. Delirium is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and is a leading presenting symptom of illness in the elderly. Elderly patients with altered mental status, including agitation, should be presumed to have delirium until proven otherwise. The clinical manifestations of delirium are highly variable. A mental status evaluation is crucial in the diagnosis of delirium. Medical evaluation and stabilization should occur in parallel. Life-threatening etiologies including hypoxia, hypoglycemia and hypotension require immediate intervention. The differential diagnosis of etiologies of delirium is extensive. Patients with delirium need thorough evaluations to determine the underlying causes of the delirium. Pharmacological agents should be considered when agitated patient has the potential to harm themselves or others, or is impeding medical evaluation and management. Unfortunately, the evidence to guide pharmacologic management of acute agitation in the elderly is limited. Current pharmacologic options include the typical and atypical antipsychotic agents and the benzodiazepines. These therapeutic options are reviewed in detail.

Assessing endoscopic colorectal screening adherence in an emergency department population.

OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the second highest cancer-related mortality rate in the United States. However, CRC screening rates, particularly by endoscopy, are dismally low. The purpose of this study is to determine the factors associated with adherence to endoscopic screening using the emergency department (ED) population. METHODS: Structured interviews in English or Spanish were administered to 122 patients, aged > or =50 in the ED of an urban academic medical center. Questions focused on sociodemographic and medical factors, knowledge deficits and attitudes towards screening as well as psychosocial factors that may be associated with screening adherence. Compliance with current screening guidelines was measured by self-report. RESULTS: The population was sociodemographically diverse. There were significant differences across ethnic groups with regards to awareness and attitudes toward screening as well participation in screening. Age >65, Spanish language during the interview, white ethnicity and having a primary care physician were significant correlates of adherence to screening colonoscopy. Once decisional balance (conspros) was entered into the model, the other factors were no longer significant. Furthermore, physician referral was the strongest correlate of adherence to endoscopic screening. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant sociodemographic, medical and psychosocial barriers preventing CRC screening adherence in ED patients, yet the strongest correlate is physician referral. The ED encounter may serve as an opportunity to provide information and referral for CRC screening.

How patients and visitors to an urban emergency department view clinical research.

OBJECTIVES: To assess views about clinical research, drawing current opinion from an urban, largely minority population within the authors' emergency department (ED). METHODS: Two focus groups of ED patients and visitors were conducted. These data informed the development of a 27-item interview examining views about clinical research and knowledge of human subjects protections. RESULTS: The authors interviewed a total of 172 patients and visitors within an adult ED. Study participants reflected the diverse patient population: 38% were African American, 32% Hispanic, 25% white, and 6% other. When asked why one might choose to participate in medical research, 46% said to benefit mankind, 26% said to improve one's own health, 18% cited access to medical care, 17% said financial incentive, and 11% said curiosity. When asked why one might decline research participation, 38% cited fear, 24% cited lack of interest in research, 10% cited medical mistrust, 9% indicated not wanting to feel like a "guinea pig," 6% indicated lack of time, and 5% suggested privacy concerns. When asked about the meaning of informed consent, 32% did not know. Many respondents (26%) were unaware that they could withdraw from a study. Although the majority (96%) endorsed a statement about the potential benefit of research for themselves or their loved ones, a sizable proportion of respondents (49%) equated research subjects to "human guinea pigs." CONCLUSIONS: Although many individuals tend to view clinical research favorably, a level of medical mistrust exists. The concerns about human experimentation and the limited understanding of human subject protections underscore the need to improve informed consent.

Evidence-based guidelines for evaluation and antimicrobial therapy for common emergency department infections.

Infections are among the most common diagnoses in the emergency department (ED), and antibiotics are among the most frequently prescribed drugs. Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) are frequently encountered in the ED, and pneumonia is the seventh leading cause of death in the United States. Cystitis, pyelonephritis, and complicated urinary tract infection (UTI) are often treated in the ED, with UTI being one of the most common reasons for healthy young women to require antimicrobial treatment. Intra-abdominal infections have an incidence of 3.5 million cases per year in the United States, and emergency clinicians must make complex decisions regarding appropriate evaluation and management. Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) are common, their incidence in the ED has been rising, and the emergence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection has altered their management. Timely diagnosis and management of infectious disease, including proper antimicrobial treatment, is an important goal of emergency care. This issue of Emergency Medicine Practice reviews the available evidence and consensus guidelines for the management of common infectious diseases presenting to the ED and presents recommendations for treatment.