Adherence to Subspecialty Guidelines in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery has published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to guide management of common otolaryngologic (ENT) conditions. While these CPGs have been disseminated within specialty journals, many patients' first presentation of certain ENT complaints is to primary and acute care settings, including the emergency department (ED). It is less clear whether practice in these settings is concordant with specialty CPGs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records was performed at an academic tertiary care center with ED diagnoses of 1) Bell's palsy/facial weakness (BP) or 2) acute otitis externa (AOE) from May 2014-June 2018. Individual chart abstraction was performed for all encounters with these diagnoses for the purpose of assessing providers' adherence to CPGs. RESULTS: During the study period, 224 patients were diagnosed with BP and 465 patients were diagnosed with AOE. Of the patients diagnosed with BP, 94% (n = 211/224) were prescribed oral steroids, concordant with guidelines, while 36% of these patients received head computed tomography (CT) scans and 43% received laboratory tests, counter to the guidelines. For those with a diagnosis of AOE, 28.6% received topical antibiotics only as primary treatment (n = 133/465) in accordance with guidelines while systemic antibiotics were prescribed in 42.2% (n = 196/465) discordant with the guidelines and 29.2% received both topical and systemic antibiotics (n = 136/465). CONCLUSIONS: CPGs developed by subspecialty societies provide evidence-based recommendations for the care of patients with particular conditions, but may not be disseminated broadly outside of the specialty. Further research is required to understand the reasons behind divergent management of such conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:1266-1270, 2021.

Design and implementation of a clinical decision support tool for primary palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER).

BACKGROUND: The emergency department is a critical juncture in the trajectory of care of patients with serious, life-limiting illness. Implementation of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool automates identification of older adults who may benefit from palliative care instead of relying upon providers to identify such patients, thus improving quality of care by assisting providers with adhering to guidelines. The Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) study aims to optimize the use of the electronic health record by creating a CDS tool to identify high risk patients most likely to benefit from primary palliative care and provide point-of-care clinical recommendations. METHODS: A clinical decision support tool entitled Emergency Department Supportive Care Clinical Decision Support (Support-ED) was developed as part of an institutionally-sponsored value based medicine initiative at the Ronald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine at NYU Langone Health. A multidisciplinary approach was used to develop Support-ED including: a scoping review of ED palliative care screening tools; launch of a workgroup to identify patient screening criteria and appropriate referral services; initial design and usability testing via the standard System Usability Scale questionnaire, education of the ED workforce on the Support-ED background, purpose and use, and; creation of a dashboard for monitoring and feedback. RESULTS: The scoping review identified the Palliative Care and Rapid Emergency Screening (P-CaRES) survey as a validated instrument in which to adapt and apply for the creation of the CDS tool. The multidisciplinary workshops identified two primary objectives of the CDS: to identify patients with indicators of serious life limiting illness, and to assist with referrals to services such as palliative care or social work. Additionally, the iterative design process yielded three specific patient scenarios that trigger a clinical alert to fire, including: 1) when an advance care planning document was present, 2) when a patient had a previous disposition to hospice, and 3) when historical and/or current clinical data points identify a serious life-limiting illness without an advance care planning document present. Monitoring and feedback indicated a need for several modifications to improve CDS functionality. CONCLUSIONS: CDS can be an effective tool in the implementation of primary palliative care quality improvement best practices. Health systems should thoughtfully consider tailoring their CDSs in order to adapt to their unique workflows and environments. The findings of this research can assist health systems in effectively integrating a primary palliative care CDS system seamlessly into their processes of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109. Registered 6 February 2018, Grant Number: AT009844-01.