Core requirements of frailty screening in the emergency department: an international Delphi consensus study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study. METHODS: A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors. RESULTS: In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include. CONCLUSIONS: Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

Balancing vision with pragmatism: The geriatric emergency department guidelines-realistic expectations from emergency medicine and geriatric medicine.

In 2014 the Geriatric Emergency Department (GED) Guidelines were published and endorsed by four major medical organizations. The multidisciplinary GED Guidelines characterize the complex needs of the older emergency department (ED) patient and current best practices with the goal of promoting more cost-effective and patient-centered care. The recommendations are extensive and the vast majority of EDs then and now do not have either the resources nor hospital administrative support to provide this additional service. At the 2021 American Academy of Emergency Medicine's Scientific Assembly, a panel of emergency medicine physicians and geriatricians discussed the GED Guidelines and the current realities of EDs' capacity to provide best practice and guideline recommended care of GED patients. This article is a synthesis of the panel's presentation and discussion. With the substantial challenges in providing guideline recommended care in EDs, this article will explore three high impact GED clinical conditions to highlight guideline recommendations, challenges and opportunities, and discuss realistically achievable expectations for non-Geriatric ED accredited institutions. In 2014 the Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines were published describing the current best practices for geriatric ED patients. Unfortunately, the vast majority of EDs worldwide do not provide the level of service recommended by the GED guidelines. The GED Guidelines can best be termed aspirational for U.S. EDs at the present time.

Impact of risk-based sexually transmitted infection screening in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including chlamydia, gonorrhea, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) pose a significant health burden in adolescents. Many adolescents receiving care in the emergency department (ED) are in need of testing, regardless of their chief complaint. Our objective was to determine whether an electronic, risk-based STI screening program in our ED was associated with an increase in STI testing among at-risk adolescents. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patient outcomes in our pediatric ED after integrating an Audio-enhanced Computer-Assisted Self-Interview (ACASI) as standard of care. It obtained a focused sexual history and generated STI testing recommendations. Patient answers and testing recommendations were integrated in real-time into the electronic health record. Patients who tested positive received treatment according to our standard-of-care practices. All patients 15-21 years of age were asked to complete this on an opt-out basis, regardless of the reason for their ED visit. Exclusions included those unable to independently use a tablet, severe illness, sexual assault, or non-English speaking. Our primary outcome was to describe STI-testing recommendations and test results among ACASI participants. We also compared STI testing between ACASI participants and those who were eligible but did not use it. RESULTS: In the first 13 months, 28.9% (1788/6194) of eligible adolescents completed the ACASI and 44.2% (321/790) accepted recommended STI testing. The mean age of participants was 16.6 ± 1.3 years, with 65.4% (1169) being female. Gonorrhea/chlamydia testing was significantly higher among participants vs. non-participants (20.1% [359/1788] vs 4.8% [212/4406]; p < 0.0001). The proportion of positive STI tests was similar between the two groups: 24.8% (89/359) vs. 24.5% (52/212; p = 0.94) were positive for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea, while 0.6% (2/354) participants vs. 0% non-participants (p > 0.99) were positive for HIV. Among participants whose chief complaints were unlikely to be related to STIs but accepted recommended testing, 20.9% (37/177) were positive for gonorrhea or chlamydia. CONCLUSIONS: Our program facilitated STI testing in the ED and identified many adolescents with STIs, even when their ED complaint was for unrelated reasons. More rigorous implementation is needed to determine the impact of deployment of ACASI to all eligible adolescents and addressing barriers to accepting STI testing recommendations.

Balancing Vision With Pragmatism: The Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines-Realistic Expectations From Emergency Medicine and Geriatric Medicine.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the Geriatric Emergency Department (GED) Guidelines were published and endorsed by four major medical organizations. The multidisciplinary GED Guidelines characterized the complex needs of the older emergency department (ED) patient and current best practices, with the goal of promoting more cost-effective and patient-centered care. The recommendations are extensive and most EDs then and now have neither the resources nor the hospital administrative support to provide this additional service. DISCUSSION: At the 2021 American Academy of Emergency Medicine's Scientific Assembly, a panel of emergency physicians and geriatricians discussed the GED Guidelines and the current realities of EDs' capacity to provide best practice and guideline-recommended care of GED patients. This article is a synthesis of the panel's presentation and discussion. With the substantial challenges in providing guideline-recommended care in EDs, this article will explore three high-impact GED clinical conditions to highlight guideline recommendations, challenges, and opportunities, and discuss realistically achievable expectations for non-GED-accredited institutions. CONCLUSIONS: In 2014, the GED Guidelines were published, describing the current best practices for GED patients. Unfortunately, most of the EDs worldwide do not provide the level of service recommended by the GED Guidelines. The GED Guidelines can best be termed aspirational for U.S. EDs at the present time.

Repeat computed tomography in recurrent abdominal pain: An evidence synthesis for guidelines for reasonable and appropriate care in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: Computed tomography (CT) imaging is frequently obtained for recurrent abdominal pain after a prior emergency department (ED) evaluation. We evaluate the utility of repeat CT imaging following an indeterminate index CT in low-risk abdominal pain adult ED patients. METHODS: An electronic search was designed for the patient-intervention-control-outcome-timing (PICOT) question: (P) adult patients with low-risk, recurrent, and previously undifferentiated atraumatic abdominal pain presenting to the ED after an index-negative CT within 12 months; (I) repeat CT versus (C) no repeat CT; for (O) abdominal surgery or other invasive procedure, mortality, identification of potentially life-threatening diagnosis, and hospital and intensive care unit admission rates; and return ED visit (T), all within 30 days. Four reviewers independently selected evidence for inclusion and then synthesized the results around the most prevalent themes of repeat CT timing, diagnostic yield, ionizing radiation exposure, and predictors of repetitive imaging. RESULTS: Although 637 articles and abstracts were identified, no direct evidence was found. Thirteen documents were synthesized as indirect evidence. None of the indirect evidence defined a low-risk subset of abdominal pain nor did investigators describe whether reimaging occurred for complaints similar to the initial ED evaluation. Included studies did not describe the index CT findings and some reported explanatory findings noted on the original CT for which repeat CTs might have been indicated. The time frame for a repeat CT ranged from hours to 1 year. The frequency of repeat CTs (2%-47%) varied across studies as did the yield of imaging to alter downstream clinical decision making (range = 5%-67%). CONCLUSION: Due to the absence of direct evidence our scoping review is unable to provide high-quality evidence-based recommendations upon which to confidently base an imaging practice guideline. There is no evidence to support or refute performing a CT for low-risk recurrent abdominal pain.

Accuracy of Dementia Screening Instruments in Emergency Medicine: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is underrecognized in older adult emergency department (ED) patients, which threatens operational efficiency, diagnostic accuracy, and patient satisfaction. The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine geriatric ED guidelines advocate dementia screening using validated instruments. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of sufficiently brief screening instruments for dementia in geriatric ED patients. A secondary objective was to define an evidence-based pretest probability of dementia based on published research and then estimate disease thresholds at which dementia screening is most appropriate. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017074855). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, DARE, and SCOPUS were searched. Studies in which ED patients ages 65 years or older for dementia were included if sufficient details to reconstruct 2 × 2 tables were reported. QUADAS-2 was used to assess study quality with meta-analysis reported if more than one study evaluated the same instrument against the same reference standard. Outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-). To identify test and treatment thresholds, we employed the Pauker-Kassirer method. RESULTS: A total of 1,616 publications were identified, of which 16 underwent full text-review; nine studies were included with a weighted average dementia prevalence of 31% (range, 12%-43%). Eight studies used the Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) as the reference standard and the other study used the MMSE in conjunction with a geriatrician's neurocognitive evaluation. Blinding to the index test and/or reference standard was inadequate in four studies. Eight instruments were evaluated in 2,423 patients across four countries in Europe and North America. The Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT-4) most accurately ruled in dementia (LR+ = 7.69 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 3.45-17.10]) while the Brief Alzheimer's Screen most accurately ruled out dementia (LR- = 0.10 [95% CI = 0.02-0.28]). Using estimates of diagnostic accuracy for AMT-4 from this meta-analysis as one trigger for more comprehensive geriatric vulnerability assessments, ED dementia screening benefits patients when the prescreening probability of dementia is between 14 and 36%. CONCLUSIONS: ED-based diagnostic research for dementia screening is limited to a few studies using an inadequate criterion standard with variable masking of interpreter's access to the index test and the criterion standard. Standardizing the geriatric ED cognitive assessment methods, measures, and nomenclature is necessary to reduce uncertainties about diagnostic accuracy, reliability, and relevance in this acute care setting. The AMT-4 is currently the most accurate ED screening instrument to increase the probability of dementia and the Brief Alzheimer's Screen is the most accurate to decrease the probability of dementia. Dementia screening as one marker of vulnerability to initiate comprehensive geriatric assessment is warranted based on test-treatment threshold calculations.

Emergency Department Directors Are Willing to Expand Reproductive Health Services for Adolescents.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Nearly 20 million adolescents receive emergency department (ED) care each year, many of whom have untreated reproductive health issues. ED visits represent an opportunity to provide appropriate care, however, ED physician reproductive health care practices and capabilities in the United States have not been described. We sought to characterize pediatric ED director's individual practice and ED system resources for providing adolescent reproductive health care. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: We invited pediatric ED division and/or medical directors nationally to participate in an anonymous, online survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included ED directors' personal practice regarding providing adolescent patients reproductive health care, and their ED's resources and standard practice regarding screening adolescents for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and other reproductive health concerns. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-five of 442 (30.5%) ED directors responded. Respondents were 73% (90/124) male, with a median of 18 (interquartile range, 13-23) years of experience and 63% (84/134) working in urban EDs. Seventy-one percent (90/130) preferred face-to-face interviews for obtaining a sexual history, but only 59% (77/130) of participants "always ask parents to leave the room for sensitive questions." Eighty-four percent (106/127) were receptive to pregnancy prevention interventions being initiated in the ED, with 75% (80/106) of those willing to provide an intervention. Only 16% (21/128) indicated their ED has a universal STI screening program, and only 18% (23/126) "always" successfully notify patients of a positive STI test. CONCLUSION: ED directors are comfortable providing adolescent reproductive health care, and many individual- and ED-level opportunities exist to provide improved reproductive health care for adolescents in the ED.

North American survey on the post-neuroimaging management of children with mild head injuries.

OBJECTIVEThere remains uncertainty regarding the appropriate level of care and need for repeating neuroimaging among children with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) complicated by intracranial injury (ICI). This study's objective was to investigate physician practice patterns and decision-making processes for these patients in order to identify knowledge gaps and highlight avenues for future investigation.METHODSThe authors surveyed residents, fellows, and attending physicians from the following pediatric specialties: emergency medicine; general surgery; neurosurgery; and critical care. Participants came from 10 institutions in the United States and an email list maintained by the Canadian Neurosurgical Society. The survey asked respondents to indicate management preferences for and experiences with children with mTBI complicated by ICI, focusing on an exemplar clinical vignette of a 7-year-old girl with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 and a 5-mm subdural hematoma without midline shift after a fall down stairs.RESULTSThe response rate was 52% (n = 536). Overall, 326 (61%) respondents indicated they would recommend ICU admission for the child in the vignette. However, only 62 (12%) agreed/strongly agreed that this child was at high risk of neurological decline. Half of respondents (45%; n = 243) indicated they would order a planned follow-up CT (29%; n = 155) or MRI scan (19%; n = 102), though only 64 (12%) agreed/strongly agreed that repeat neuroimaging would influence their management. Common factors that increased the likelihood of ICU admission included presence of a focal neurological deficit (95%; n = 508 endorsed), midline shift (90%; n = 480) or an epidural hematoma (88%; n = 471). However, 42% (n = 225) indicated they would admit all children with mTBI and ICI to the ICU. Notably, 27% (n = 143) of respondents indicated they had seen one or more children with mTBI and intracranial hemorrhage demonstrate a rapid neurological decline when admitted to a general ward in the last year, and 13% (n = 71) had witnessed this outcome at least twice in the past year.CONCLUSIONSMany physicians endorse ICU admission and repeat neuroimaging for pediatric mTBI with ICI, despite uncertainty regarding the clinical utility of those decisions. These results, combined with evidence that existing practice may provide insufficient monitoring to some high-risk children, emphasize the need for validated decision tools to aid the management of these patients.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa 3DY and Short Blessed Test to detect cognitive dysfunction in geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Cognitive dysfunction (CD) is a common finding in geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Our primary objective was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa 3DY (O3DY) and Short Blessed Test (SBT) as screening tools for the detection of CD in the ED. Our secondary objective was to estimate the inter-rater reliability of these instruments. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional comparative study at an inner-city academic medical centre (annual ED visit census 86 000). Patients aged 75 years or greater were evaluated for inclusion, 163 were screened, 150 were deemed eligible and 117 were enrolled. The research team completed the O3DY, SBT and Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) for each participant. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Sensitivity and specificity of the O3DY and SBT were calculated in STATA V.11.2 using the MMSE as our criterion standard. RESULTS: We enrolled 117 patients from June to November 2016. The median ED length of stay at the time of completion of all tests was 1:40 (IQR 1:34-1:46). The sensitivity of the O3DY was 71.4% (95% CI 47.8 to 95.1), and specificity was 56.3% (46.7-65.9). Sensitivity of the SBT was 85.7% (67.4-99.9) and specificity was 58.3% (48.7-67.8). The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve was calculated for the O3DY (0.51; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.61) and SBT (0.52; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.61) relative to the MMSE. Inter-rater reliability for the O3DY (k=0.64) and SBT (k=0.63) were good. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of geriatric patients presenting to an inner-city academic ED, the O3DY and SBT tools demonstrate moderate sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CD. Inter-rater reliability for the O3DY and SBT were good. Future research on this topic should attempt to derive and validate ED-specific screening tools, which will hopefully result in more robust likelihood ratios for the screening of CD in ED geriatric patients.

Informed Consent to Research with Cognitively Impaired Adults: Transdisciplinary Challenges and Opportunities.

Due to issues related to informed research consent, older adults with cognitive impairments are often excluded from high-quality studies that are not directly related to cognitive impairment, which has led to a dearth of evidence for this population. The challenges to including cognitively impaired older adults in research and the implications of their exclusion are a transdisciplinary issue. The ethical challenges and logistical barriers to conducting research with cognitively impaired older adults are addressed from the perspectives of three different fields-social work, emergency medicine, and orthopaedic surgery. Issues related to funding, study design, intervention components, and outcomes are discussed through the unique experiences of three different providers. A fourth perspective-medical research ethics-provides alternatives to exclusion when conducting research with cognitively impaired older adults such as timing, corrective feedback and plain language, and capacity assessment and proxy appointments. Given the increasing aging population and the lack of evidence on cognitively impaired older adults, it is critical that researchers, funders, and institutional review boards not be dissuaded from including this population in research studies.

Screening and detection of elder abuse: Research opportunities and lessons learned from emergency geriatric care, intimate partner violence, and child abuse.

This article provides an overview of elder abuse screening and detection methods for community-dwelling and institutionalized older adults, including general issues and challenges for the field. Then, discussions of applications in emergency geriatric care, intimate partner violence (IPV), and child abuse are presented to inform research opportunities in elder abuse screening. The article provides descriptions of emerging screening and detection methods and technologies from the emergency geriatric care and IPV fields. We also discuss the variety of potential barriers to effective screening and detection from the viewpoint of the older adult, caregivers, providers, and the health care system, and we highlight the potential harms and unintended negative consequences of increased screening and mandatory reporting. We argue that research should continue on the development of valid screening methods and tools, but that studies of perceived barriers and potential harms of elder abuse screening among key stakeholders should also be conducted.

The 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-relevant Patient-centered Research Agenda May 10, 2016, New Orleans, LA.

Shared decision making in emergency medicine has the potential to improve the quality, safety, and outcomes of emergency department (ED) patients. Given that the ED is the gateway to care for patients with a variety of illnesses and injuries and the safety net for patients otherwise unable to access care, shared decision making in the ED is relevant to numerous disciplines and the interests of the United States (U.S.) public. On May 10, 2016 the 16th annual Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference, "Shared Decision Making: Development of a Policy-Relevant Patient-Centered Research Agenda" was held in New Orleans, Louisiana. During this one-day conference clinicians, researchers, policy-makers, patient and caregiver representatives, funding agency representatives, trainees, and content experts across many areas of medicine interacted to define high priority areas for research in 1 of 6 domains: 1) diagnostic testing; 2) policy, 3) dissemination/implementation and education, 4) development and testing of shared decision making approaches and tools in practice, 5) palliative care and geriatrics, and 6) vulnerable populations and limited health literacy. This manuscript describes the current state of shared decision making in the ED context, provides an overview of the conference planning process, the aims of the conference, the focus of each respective breakout session, the roles of patient and caregiver representatives and an overview of the conference agenda. The results of this conference published in this issue of AEM provide an essential summary of the future research priorities for shared decision making to increase quality of care and patient-centered outcomes.

Prehospital emergency services screening and referral to reduce falls in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Falls represent an increasing source of geriatric morbidity and mortality. Prehospital emergency services may be uniquely suited to screen and refer subsets of high-risk older adults to fall prevention programmes. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of such screening and referral programmes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and OTseeker for English-language peer-reviewed randomised trials, non-randomised trials and cohort studies evaluating prehospital fall risk screening and referral programmes for community-dwelling adults ≥60 years of age. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Primary outcomes included the risk and rate of falling. Secondary outcomes included successful follow-up to address fall risks and adverse events. RESULTS: From 6187 unique records, 6 studies were included. Screening varied from using semistructured risk assessments to recording chief complaints. All studies were at high risk of bias. One unblinded trial of a multifactorial fall prevention programme demonstrated a 14.3% (95% CI 6.1% to 22.5%) absolute reduction in annual fall risk and a relative fall incidence of 0.45 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.58). The probability of successful follow-up varied from 9.8% to 81.0%. No studies demonstrated any attributable adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: No high-quality evidence demonstrates that prehospital services reduce falls in community-dwelling older adults. Screening by prehospital personnel using semistructured risk assessments appears feasible, but it is unclear whether this is superior to referral based on fall-related chief complaints. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO 2012:CRD42012002782.

Systematic review of falls in older adults with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults frequently experience falls, at great cost to themselves and society. Older adults with cancer may be at greater risk for falls and have unique risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of the available medical literature to examine the current evidence regarding factors associated with falls in older adults with cancer. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, DARE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and clinical trials.gov were searched using standardized terms for concepts of oncology/cancer, people 60 and older, screening, falls and diagnosis. Eligible studies included cohort or case-control studies or clinical trials in which all patients, or a subgroup of patients, had a diagnosis of cancer and in which falls were either the primary or secondary outcome. RESULTS: We identified 31 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Several studies suggest that falls are more common in older adults with a diagnosis of cancer than those without. Among the 11 studies that explored factors associated with outpatient falls, some risk factors for falls established in the general population were also associated with falls in older adults with cancer, including dependence in activities of daily living and prior falls. Other factors associated with falls in a general population, such as age, polypharmacy and opioid use, were not predictive of falls among oncology populations. Falls among older adults with cancer in the inpatient setting were associated with established risk factors for falls in people without cancer, but also with factors unique to an oncology population, such as brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Falls in older adults with cancer are more common than in the general population, and are associated with risk factors unique to people with cancer. Further study is needed to establish methods of screening older adults with cancer for fall risk and ultimately implement interventions to reduce their risk of falls. Identifying which older adults with cancer are at greater risk for falls is a requisite step to ultimately intervene and prevent falls in this vulnerable population.