Quality evaluation of the usefulness of an emergency department fall risk assessment tool.

INTRODUCTION: Falls that occur within a hospital setting are difficult to predict, however, are preventable adverse events with the potential to negatively impact patient care. Falls have the potential to cause serious or fatal injuries and may increase patient morbidity. Many hospitals utilize fall "predictor tools" to categorize a patient's fall risk, however, these tools are primarily studied within in-patient units. The emergency department (ED) presents a unique environment with a distinct patient population and demographic. The Memorial Emergency Department Fall Risk Assessment Tool (MEDFRAT) has shown to be effective with predicting a patient's fall risk in the ED. This IRB-approved study aims to assess the predictive validity of the MEDFRAT by evaluating the sensitivity and specificity for predicting a patient's fall risk in an emergency department at a level 1 trauma center. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using an electronic medical record (EMR) for patients who met study inclusion criteria at a level 1 trauma center ED. Extracted data includes MEDFRAT components, demographic information, and data from the Moving Safely Risk Assessment (MSRA) Tool, our institution's current fall assessment tool. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to determine the best cutoff for identifying any fall risk. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and negative LR (LR-), with 95% CIs were then calculated for the cutoff value determined from the ROC curve. To compare overall tool performance, the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) were determined and compared with a z-test. RESULTS: The MEDFRAT had a significantly higher sensitivity compared to the MSRA (83.1% vs. 66.1%, p = 0.002), while the MSRA had a significantly higher specificity (84.5% vs. 69.0%, p = 0.012). For identifying any level of fall risk, ROC curve analysis showed that the cutoff providing the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity for the MEDFRAT was a score of ≥1. Additionally, area under the curve was determined for the MEDFRAT and MSRA (0.817 vs. 0.737). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the validity of the MEDFRAT as an acceptable tool to predict in-hospital falls in a level 1 trauma center ED. Accurate identification of patients at a high risk of falling is critical for decreasing healthcare costs and improving health outcomes and patient safety.

Performance-Based Assessment of Trauma Systems: Estimates for the State of Ohio.

OBJECTIVES: There are no widely accepted metrics to determine the optimal number and geographic distribution of trauma centers (TCs). We propose a Performance-based Assessment of Trauma System (PBATS) model to optimize the number and distribution of TCs in a region using key performance metrics. METHODS: The proposed PBATS approach relies on well-established mathematical programming approach to minimize the number of level I (LI) and level II (LII) TCs required in a region, constrained by prespecified system-related under-triage (srUT) and over-triage (srOT) rates and TC volume. To illustrate PBATS, we collected 6002 matched (linked) records from the 2012 Ohio Trauma and EMS registries. The PBATS-suggested network was compared to the 2012 Ohio network and also to the configuration proposed by the Needs-Based Assessment of Trauma System (NBATS) tool. RESULTS: For this data, PBATS suggested 14 LI/II TCs with a slightly different geographic distribution compared to the 2012 network with 21 LI and LII TC, for the same srUT≈.2 and srOT≈.52. To achieve UT ≤ .05, PBATS suggested 23 LI/II TCs with a significantly different distribution. The NBATS suggested fewer TCs (12 LI/II) than the Ohio 2012 network. CONCLUSION: The PBATS approach can generate a geographically optimized network of TCs to achieve prespecified performance characteristics such as srUT rate, srOT rate, and TC volume. Such a solution may provide a useful data-driven standard, which can be used to drive incremental system changes and guide policy decisions.

Why Interested Surgeons Are Not Choosing Rural Surgery: What Can We Do Now?

BACKGROUND: There is a growing deficit of rural surgeons, and preparation to meet this need is inadequate. More research into stratifying factors that specifically influence choice in rural versus urban practice is needed. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved survey related to factors influencing rural practice selection and increasing rural recruitment was distributed through the American College of Surgeons. The results were analyzed descriptively and thematically. RESULTS: Of 416 respondents (74% male), 287 (69%) had previous rural experience. Of those, 71 (25%) did not choose rural practice; lack of professional or hospital support (30%) and lifestyle (26%) were the primary reasons. A broad scope of practice was most important among surgeons (52%), who chose rural practice without any previous rural experience. Over 60% of urban practitioners agreed that improved lifestyle and financial advantages would attract them to rural practice. The thematic analysis suggested institutional support, affiliation with academic institutions, and less focus on subspecialty fellowship could help increase the number of rural surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Many factors influence surgeons' decisions on practice location. Providing appropriate hospital support in rural areas and promoting specific aspects of rural practice, including broad scope of practice to those in training could help grow interest in rural surgery. Strong collaboration with academic institutions for teaching, learning, and mentoring opportunities for rural surgeons could also lead to higher satisfaction, security, and potentially higher retention rate. These results provide a foundation to help focus specific efforts and resources in the recruitment and retention of rural surgeons.

The Affordable Care Act: Long-Term Financial Impact on a Level I Trauma Center.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies of the impact of the Affordable Care Act on reimbursement for inpatient trauma care do not include disproportionate share hospital (DSH) funding. Because trauma centers and other safety-net hospitals are sensitive to any changes in financial support, it is essential to include DSH funding in evaluating overall reimbursement. This study analyzes the long-term financial trends, including DSH, of a level I trauma center in Ohio, a state that expanded Medicaid. METHODS: Charges, reimbursement, sources of insurance coverage, Injury Severity Scores, and DSH funding for the trauma patient population of an Ohio American College of Surgeons level 1 trauma center were studied from 2012 to 2017. Data were collected from Transition Systems, Inc. RESULTS: During 2012-2017, self-pay patient cases decreased from 15.0% to 4.1% and commercial insurance patients decreased from 34.2% to 27.6%. The percentage of Medicaid patients increased from 15.5% to 27.1%; however, Medicaid reimbursement average per case declined from $17,779 in 2012 to $10,115 in 2017 (a decline of 43.1%). Self-pay charges decreased from $22.0 million to $6.7 million. Total DSH funding, compensation given to hospitals that disproportionately treat underserved populations, decreased 17.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Self-pay charges and self-pay patients decreased dramatically; Medicaid patients and charges increased substantially in the years after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act at our trauma center. However, there was a decrease in commercial insurance, which had the highest reimbursement for our hospital, and a significant decline in DSH, a critical supplemental source of funding for safety-net hospitals.

Simulation-based end-of-life care training during surgical clerkship: assessment of skills and perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of interpersonal and psychosocial competencies during end-of-life care training is essential. This study reports the relationship between simulation-based end-of-life care Objective Structured Clinical Examination ratings and communication skills, trust, and self-assessed empathy along with the perceptions of students regarding their training experiences. METHOD: Medical students underwent simulation-based end-of-life care OSCE training that involved standardized patients who evaluated students' communication skills and physician trust with the Kalamazoo Essential Elements Communication Checklist and the Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale. Students also completed the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy. Pearson correlation was used to examine the relationship between OSCE performance grades and communication, trust, and empathy scores. Student comments were analyzed using the constant comparative method of analysis to identify dominant themes. RESULTS: The 389 students (mean age 26.6 ± 2.8 y; 54.5% female) had OSCE grades that were positively correlated with physician trust scores (r = 0.325, P < 0.01) and communication skills (r = 0.383, P < 0.01). However, OSCE grades and self-reported empathy were not related (r = 0.021, P = 0.68). Time of clerkship differed for OSCE grade and physician trust scores; however, there was no trend identified. No differences were noted between the time of clerkship and communication skills or empathy. Overall, students perceived simulation-based end-of-life care training to be a valuable learning experience and appreciated its placement early in clinical training. CONCLUSIONS: We found that simulation-based OSCE training in palliative and end-of-life care can be effectively conducted during a surgery clerkship. Moreover, the standardized patient encounters combined with the formal assessment of communication skills, physician trust, and empathy provide feedback to students at an early phase of their professional life. The positive and appreciative comments of students regarding the opportunity to practice difficult patient conversations suggest that attention to these professional characteristics and skills is a valued element of clinical training and conceivably a step toward better patient outcomes and satisfaction.