Flexible endoscopic intubation in emergency medicine: A mixed-methods needs assessment.

Objectives: This needs assessment aimed to improve understanding of flexible endoscopic intubation training and practice in emergency medicine (EM), providing insights to educators and practice leaders seeking to improve education and practices. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, mixed-methods needs assessment of emergency physicians (EPs) incorporating focus groups and a survey. Focus groups comprised community EPs, academic EPs, and resident EPs. We analyzed focus group transcripts using grounded theory, qualitatively describing EM endoscopic intubation. The qualitative analysis shaped our survey instrument, which we deployed in cross-sectional fashion. We report survey data with descriptive statistics. Results: Focus groups with 13 EPs identified three themes: indications for use of endoscopic intubation, factors impacting a physician's decision to endoscopically intubate, and attaining and maintaining endoscopic intubation competency. Of 257 surveyed EPs (33% response rate), 79% had received endoscopic intubation training during residency, though 82% had performed this procedure 10 or fewer times in their career. Despite 97% acknowledging the necessity of competency, only 23% felt highly confident in their ability to perform endoscopic intubation. Participants (93%) reported scarce opportunities to perform the procedure and identified factors believed to facilitate competency acquisition and maintenance, including opportunities to perform endoscopic intubation in practice (98%), local champions (93%), and performing nasopharyngoscopy (87%). Conclusions: While most EPs acknowledged the importance of competency in endoscopic intubation, they reported scarce procedural opportunities and commonly expressed low confidence. Further research is needed on this topic, and we propose avenues to enhance education and practices related to endoscopic intubation. These include development of robust procedural curricula, support of local champions, and incorporating nasopharyngoscopy into EM practice.

Education curriculum assessment for teaching electrocardiography: Rationale and design for the prospective, international, randomized controlled EDUCATE trial.

BACKGROUND: Electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation training is a fundamental component of medical education across disciplines. However, the skill of interpreting ECGs is not universal among medical graduates, and numerous barriers and challenges exist in medical training and clinical practice. An evidence-based and widely accessible learning solution is needed. DESIGN: The EDUcation Curriculum Assessment for Teaching Electrocardiography (EDUCATE) Trial is a prospective, international, investigator-initiated, open-label, randomized controlled trial designed to determine the efficacy of self-directed and active-learning approaches of a web-based educational platform for improving ECG interpretation proficiency. Target enrollment is 1000 medical professionals from a variety of medical disciplines and training levels. Participants will complete a pre-intervention baseline survey and an ECG interpretation proficiency test. After completion, participants will be randomized into one of four groups in a 1:1:1:1 fashion: (i) an online, question-based learning resource, (ii) an online, lecture-based learning resource, (iii) an online, hybrid question- and lecture-based learning resource, or (iv) a control group with no ECG learning resources. The primary endpoint will be the change in overall ECG interpretation performance according to pre- and post-intervention tests, and it will be measured within and compared between medical professional groups. Secondary endpoints will include changes in ECG interpretation time, self-reported confidence, and interpretation accuracy for specific ECG findings. CONCLUSIONS: The EDUCATE Trial is a pioneering initiative aiming to establish a practical, widely available, evidence-based solution to enhance ECG interpretation proficiency among medical professionals. Through its innovative study design, it tackles the currently unaddressed challenges of ECG interpretation education in the modern era. The trial seeks to pinpoint performance gaps across medical professions, compare the effectiveness of different web-based ECG content delivery methods, and create initial evidence for competency-based standards. If successful, the EDUCATE Trial will represent a significant stride towards data-driven solutions for improving ECG interpretation skills in the medical community.

Assessment of ED triage of anaphylaxis patients based on the Emergency Severity Index.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the emergency department (ED) triage of anaphylaxis patients based on the Emergency Severity Index (ESI), assess the association between ESI triage level and ED epinephrine administration, and determine characteristics associated with lower acuity triage ESI assignment (levels 3 and 4). METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of adult and pediatric anaphylaxis patients between September 2010 and September 2018 at an academic ED. Patient characteristics and management were compared between Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage level 1 or 2 versus levels 3 or 4 using logistic regression analysis. We adhered to STROBE reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1090 patient visits were included. There were 26 (2%), 515 (47%), 489 (45%), and 60 (6%) visits that were assigned an ESI triage level of 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Epinephrine was administered in the ED to 53% of patients triaged ESI level 1 or 2 and to 40% of patients triaged ESI level 3 or 4. Patients who were assigned a lower acuity ESI level of 3 or 4 had a longer median time from ED arrival to epinephrine administration compared to those with a higher acuity ESI level of 1 or 2 (28 min compared to 13 min, p < .001). A lower acuity ESI level was more likely to be assigned to visits with a chief concern of hives, rash, or pruritus (OR 2.33 [95% CI, 1.20-4.53]) and less likely to be assigned to visits among adults (OR, 0.43 [0.31-0.60]), patients who received epinephrine from emergency medical services (OR 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), presented with posterior pharyngeal or uvular angioedema (OR, 0.56 [0.38-0.82]), hypoxemia (OR, 0.34 [0.18-0.64]), or increased heart (OR 0.83 [0.73-0.95]) or respiratory (OR 0.70 [0.60-0.82]) rates. CONCLUSION: Patients triaged to lower acuity ESI levels experienced delays in ED epinephrine administration. Adult and pediatric patients with skin-related chief concerns were more likely to be to be assigned lower acuity ESI levels. Further studies are needed to identify interventions that will improve ED anaphylaxis triage.

Medicare Reimbursement to Physicians Decreased for Common Emergency Medicine Services From 2000 to 2020.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The change in reimbursement rates for emergency physician services has yet to be quantified. We attempted to fill this knowledge gap by evaluating the monetary trends in Medicare reimbursement rates over the last 20 years for the most common emergency medicine services. METHODS: We obtained commonly used Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes in emergency medicine from the American College of Emergency Physicians website. We queried the Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for each of the included CPT codes, and we extracted reimbursement data. We adjusted all monetary data for inflation to 2020 US dollars by using changes to the United States consumer price index. Both the average annual and the total percentage change in reimbursement were calculated on the basis of these adjusted trends for all included services. RESULTS: Reimbursement by Medicare for the services decreased by an average of 29.13% from 2000 to 2020 after adjusting for inflation. There was a stable decline in adjusted reimbursement rates throughout the study period, with an average decrease of 1.61% each year. The largest decrease was seen for laceration repairs up to 7.5 cm, with reimbursement rates for all 4 relevant CPT codes decreasing by more than 60%. CONCLUSION: When adjusted for inflation, Medicare reimbursement declined by an average of 29% over the last 20 years for the 20 most common emergency medicine services. Knowledge of these trends is essential to address current controversies in emergency medicine billing adequately and advocate for sustainable payment system reform.