Rising high-acuity emergency care services independently billed by advanced practice providers, 2013 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Advanced practice providers (APPs) comprise an increasing proportion of the emergency medicine (EM) workforce, particularly in rural geographies. With little known regarding potential expanding practice patterns, we sought to evaluate trends in independent emergency care services billed by APPs from 2013 to 2019. METHODS: We performed a repeated cross-sectional analysis of emergency clinicians independently reimbursed for at least 50 evaluation and management (E/M) services (99281-99285, 99291) from Medicare Part B, with high-acuity services including Codes 99285 and 99291. We describe the outcome proportion of E/M services by acuity level and report at (1) the encounter level and (2) at the clinician level. We stratified analyses by clinician type and geography. RESULTS: A total of 47,323 EM physicians, 10,555 non-EM physicians, and 26,599 APPs were included in analyses. APPs billed emergency care services independently for 5.1% (rural 7.3%, urban 4.8%) of all high-acuity encounters in 2013, increasing to 9.7% (rural 16.4%, urban 8.8%) by 2019. At the clinician level, in 2013, the average rural-practicing APP independently billed 22.8% of services as high acuity, 72.6% as moderate acuity, and 4.5% as low acuity. By 2019, the average rural-practicing APP independently billed 36.2% of services as high acuity, representing a +58.8% relative increase from 2013. Relative increases in high-acuity visits independently billed by APPs were substantially greater when compared to EM physicians across both rural and urban geographies. CONCLUSIONS: In 2019, APPs billed independent services for approximately one in six high-acuity ED encounters in rural geographies and one in 11 high-acuity ED encounters in urban geographies, and well over one-third of the average APPs' encounters were for high-acuity E/M services. Given differences in training and reimbursement between clinician types, these estimates suggest further work is needed evaluating emergency care staffing decision making.

Improving Sepsis Management Through the Emergency Quality Network Sepsis Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Public reporting of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) SEP-1 sepsis quality measure is often too late and without the data granularity to inform real-time quality improvement (QI). In response, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Emergency Quality Network (E-QUAL) Sepsis Initiative sought to support QI efforts through benchmarking of preliminary draft SEP-1 scores for emergency department (ED) patients. This study sought to determine the anticipatory value of these preliminary SEP-1 benchmarking scores and publicly reported performance. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis was performed on QI data collected from hospital-based ED sites participating in the E-QUAL Sepsis Collaborative in 2017 and 2018. Participating EDs submitted SEP-1 benchmarking scores semiannually, which were compared to publicly reported CMS SEP-1 data. EDs also reported implementation data on a variety of sepsis-related QI activities for comparison based on SEP-1 performance. RESULTS: Among 220 EDs participating in E-QUAL, SEP-1 benchmarking scores showed weak but statistically significant correlation with CMS SEP-1 scores (r = 0.189, p = 0.01). Mean E-QUAL SEP-1 benchmarking scores were higher than mean CMS SEP-1 scores (74.1% vs. 57.2%), with 83.2% of sites reporting a benchmarking score higher than the CMS SEP-1 score. EDs with SEP-1 scores in the bottom 20% reported completion of more sepsis-related QI activities than EDs with average or top 20% SEP-1 scores. CONCLUSION: Preliminary benchmarking results demonstrate a weak, statistically significant correlation with subsequent publicly reported CMS SEP-1 scores and suggest that ED performance in sepsis care may exceed overall hospital performance inclusive of all inpatients. Sepsis quality measurement and sepsis QI efforts may be best guided by separating ED sepsis cases from in-hospital sepsis cases as is done for other acute time-sensitive conditions.

Emergency clinician participation and performance in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System.

BACKGROUND: The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is the largest national pay-for-performance program and the first to afford emergency clinicians unique financial incentives for quality measurement and improvement. With little known regarding its impact on emergency clinicians, we sought to describe participation in the MIPS and examine differences in performance scores and payment adjustments based on reporting affiliation and reporting strategy. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2018 Quality Payment Program (QPP) Experience Report data set. We categorized emergency clinicians by their reporting affiliation (individual, group, MIPS alternative payment model [APM]), MIPS performance scores, and Medicare Part B payment adjustments. We calculated performance scores for common quality measures contributing to the quality category score if reported through qualified clinical data registries (QCDRs) or claims-based reporting strategies. RESULTS: In 2018, a total of 59,828 emergency clinicians participated in the MIPS-1,246 (2.1%) reported as individuals, 43,404 (72.5%) reported as groups, and 15,178 (25.4%) reported within MIPS APMs. Clinicians reporting as individuals earned lower overall MIPS scores (median [interquartile range {IQR}] = 30.8 [15.0-48.2] points) than those reporting within groups (median [IQR] = 88.4 [49.3-100.0]) and MIPS APMs (median [IQR] = 100.0 [100.0-100.0]; p < 0.001) and more frequently incurred penalties with a negative payment adjustment. Emergency clinicians had higher measure scores if reporting QCDR or QPP non-emergency medicine specialty set measures. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency clinician participation in national value-based programs is common, with one in four participating through MIPS APMs. Those employing specific strategies such as QCDR and group reporting received the highest MIPS scores and payment adjustments, emphasizing the role that reporting strategy and affiliation play in the quality of care.

Evaluating Nontechnical Skills in US Emergency Departments Using Simulation: Validating and Contextualizing a UK Assessment Tool.

INTRODUCTION: Nontechnical skills (NTS) in medicine are the "cognitive, social, and personal resource skills that complement technical skills contributing to safe and efficient care." We aimed to (1) evaluate the validity and reliability of a 12-element United Kingdom emergency medicine (EM) NTS assessment tool in the context of United States (US) EM practice and (2) identify behaviors unique to US clinical practice. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study conducted in 2 phases, following Kane's validity framework. The intended use of the NTS tool is to provide formative assessment of US EM physicians (EPs) from a video of simulated clinical encounters. In phase I, a focus group assessed the appropriateness of each aspect of the tool in the context of US EM practice by reviewing and identifying the NTS of an EP in a simulated clinical scenario. In phase II, EPs (N = 208) attending a national EM conference evaluated an EP's behaviors in 1 of 2 video simulations. Reliability in the form of internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α. All participants suggested exemplar behaviors for the 12 elements in the context of their own clinical practice and generated new assessment elements. RESULTS: Internal consistency was acceptable (α > 0.7) for all categories, except teamwork and cooperation. Participants proposed 4 novel behavioral elements and suggested US exemplar behaviors for all 12 original elements. CONCLUSIONS: This tool can be used to assess US EP's NTS for the purpose of formative assessment. Refinement of exemplar behaviors and inclusion of novel US-specific elements may optimize usability.

Choosing wisely in emergency medicine: Early results and insights from the ACEP emergency quality network (E-QUAL).

PURPOSE: To characterize performance among ED sites participating in the Emergency Quality Network (E-QUAL) Avoidable Imaging Initiative for clinical targets on the American College of Emergency Physicians Choosing Wisely list. METHODS: This was an observational study of quality improvement (QI) data collected from hospital-based ED sites in 2017-2018. Participating EDs reported imaging utilization rates (UR) and common QI practices for three Choosing Wisely targets: Atraumatic Low Back Pain, Syncope, or Minor Head Injury. RESULTS: 305 ED sites participated in the initiative. Among all ED sites, the mean imaging UR for Atraumatic Low Back Pain was 34.7% (IQR 26.3%-42.6%) for XR, 19.1% (IQR 11.4%-24.9%) for CT, and 0.09% (IQR 0%-0.9%) for MRI. The mean CT UR for Syncope was 50.0% (IQR 38.0%-61.4%). The mean CT UR for Minor Head Injury was 72.6% (IQR 65.6%-81.7%). ED sites with sustained participation showed significant decreases in CT UR in 2017 compared to 2018 for Syncope (56.4% vs 48.0%; 95% CI: -12.7%, -4.1%) and Minor Head Injury (76.3% vs 72.1%; 95% CI: -7.3%, -1.1%). There was no significant change in imaging UR for Atraumatic Back Pain for XR (36.0% vs 33.3%; 95% CI: -5.9%, -0;5%), CT (20.1% vs 17.7%; 95% CI: -5.1%, -0.4%) or MRI (0.8% vs 0.7%, 95% CI: -0.4%, -0.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Early data from the E-QUAL Avoidable Imaging Initiative suggests QI interventions could potentially improve imaging stewardship and reduce low-value care. Further efforts to translate the Choosing Wisely recommendations into practice should promote data-driven benchmarking and learning collaboratives to achieve sustained practice improvement.

Increases in Actual Health Care Costs and Claims After Firearm Injury.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of firearm injury and death in the United States is increasing. Although the health care-related effect of firearm injury is estimated to be high, existing data are largely cross-sectional, do not include data on preinjury and postinjury health care visits and related costs, and use hospital charges rather than actual monetary payments. OBJECTIVE: To compare actual health care costs (that is, actual monetary payments) and utilizations within the 6 months before and after an incident (index) firearm injury. DESIGN: Before-after study. SETTING: Blue Cross Blue Shield plans of Illinois, Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Montana. PARTICIPANTS: Plan members continuously enrolled for at least 12 months before and after an index firearm injury sustained between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2017. MEASUREMENTS: Eligible costs, out-of-pocket costs, and firearm injury-related International Classification of Diseases, Ninth or 10th Revision, codes. RESULTS: Total initial (emergency department [ED]) health care costs for persons with index firearm injuries who were discharged from the ED were $8 158 786 ($5686 per member). Total initial (hospital admission) costs for persons with index firearm injuries who required hospitalization were $41 255 916 ($70 644 per member). Compared with the 6 months before the index firearm injury, in the 6 months after, per-member costs increased by 347% (from $3984 to $17 806 per member) for those discharged from the ED and 2138% (from $4118 to $92 151 per member) for those who were hospitalized. The number of claims increased by 187% for patients discharged from the ED and 608% for those who were hospitalized. LIMITATION: Firearm injury intent was not specified because of misclassification concerns. CONCLUSION: In the 6 months after a firearm injury, patient-level health care visits and costs increased by 3 to 20 times compared with the 6 months prior. The burden of firearm injury on the health care system is large and quantifiable. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Advanced imaging and trends in hospitalizations from the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: The proportion of US emergency department (ED) visits that lead to hospitalization has declined over time. The degree to which advanced imaging use contributed to this trend is unknown. Our objective was to examine the association between advanced imaging use during ED visits and changes in ED hospitalization rates between 2007-2008 and 2015-2016. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. The primary outcome was ED hospitalization, including admission to inpatient and observation units and outside transfers. The primary exposure was advanced imaging during the ED visit, including computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound. We constructed a survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression with binary outcome of ED hospitalization to examine changes in adjusted hospitalization rates from 2007-2008 to 2015-2016, comparing ED visits with and without advanced imaging. RESULTS: ED patients who received advanced imaging (versus those who did not) were more likely to be 65 years or older (25.3% vs 13.0%), non-Hispanic white (65.3% vs 58.5%), female (58.4% vs 54.1%), and have Medicare (26.5% vs 16.0%). Among ED visits with advanced imaging, adjusted annual hospitalization rate declined from 22.5% in 2007-2008 to 17.3% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.77; 95% CI 0.68, 0.86) in 2015-2016. In the same periods, among ED visits without advanced imaging, adjusted annual hospitalization rate declined from 14.3% to 11.6% (aRR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73, 0.90). The aRRs between ED visits with and without advanced imaging were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: From 2007-2016, ED visits with advanced imaging did not have a greater reduction in admission rate compared to those without advanced imaging. Our results suggest that increasing advanced imaging use likely had a limited role in the general decline in hospital admissions from EDs. Future research is needed to further validate this finding.

Effect of Accountable Care Organizations on Emergency Medicine Payment and Care Redesign: A Qualitative Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Accountable care organizations are provider networks aiming to improve quality while reducing costs for populations. It is unknown how value-based care within accountable care organizations affects emergency medicine care delivery and payment. Our objective was to describe how accountable care has impacted emergency care redesign and payment. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study of accountable care organizations, consisting of semistructured interviews with emergency department (ED) and accountable care organization leaders responsible for strategy, care redesign, and payment. We analyzed transcripts for key themes, using thematic analysis techniques. RESULTS: We performed 22 interviews across 7 accountable care organizations. All sites were enrolled in the Medicare Shared Savings Program; however, sites varied in region and maturity with respect to population health initiatives. Nearly all sites were focused on reducing low-value ED visits, expanding alternate venues for acute unscheduled care, and redesigning care to reduce ED admission rates through expanded care coordination, including programs targeting high-risk populations such as older adults and frequent ED users, telehealth, and expanded use of direct transfer to skilled nursing facilities from the ED. However, there has been no significant reform of payment for emergency medical care within these accountable care organizations. Nearly all informants expressed concern in regard to reduced ED reimbursement, given accountable care organization efforts to reduce ED utilization and increase clinician participation in alternative payment contracts. No participants expressed a clear vision for reforming payment for ED services. CONCLUSION: Care redesign within accountable care organizations has focused on outpatient access and alternatives to hospitalization. However, there has been little influence on emergency medicine payment, which remains fee for service. Evidence-based policy solutions are urgently needed to inform the adoption of value-based payment for acute unscheduled care.

Medicaid Expansion Reduced Emergency Department Visits by Low-income Adults Due to Barriers to Outpatient Care.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have found conflicting effects of Medicaid expansion on emergency department (ED) utilization but have not studied the reasons patients go to EDs. OBJECTIVES: Examine the changes in reasons for ED use associated with Medicaid expansion. RESEARCH DESIGN: Difference-in-difference analysis. SUBJECTS: We included sample adults from the 2012 to 2017 National Health Interview Survey who were US citizens and reported a total family income below 138% federal poverty level (n=30,259). MEASURES: We examined changes in the proportion of study subjects reporting: (1) any ED visits; (2) ED visits due to perceived illness severity; (3) office not open; and (4) barriers to outpatient care, comparing expansion and nonexpansion states. RESULTS: Overall, 30.6% of low-income adults reported ED use in the past year, of which 74.1% reported illness acuity, 12.4% reported office not open, 9.5% reported access barriers, and 4.0% did not report any reason. Medicaid expansion was not associated with statistically significant changes in overall ED use [-2.2% (95% confidence interval-CI), -5.5% to 1.2%), P=0.21], ED visits due to perceived illness severity [0.5% (95% CI, -2.4% to 3.5%), P=0.73], or office not open [-0.9% (95% CI, -2.3% to 0.5%); P=0.22], but was associated with significant decrease in ED visits due to access barriers [-1.4% (95% CI, -2.6% to -0.2%), P=0.022]. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with a decrease in low-income adults who reported outpatient care barriers as reasons for ED visits. There were no significant changes in overall ED utilization, likely because the majority of respondent reported ED use due to concerns with illness severity or outpatient office was closed.

Effects of Rescheduling Hydrocodone on Opioid Prescribing in Ohio.

BACKGROUND: We quantified opioid prescribing after the 2014 rescheduling of hydrocodone from schedule III to II in the United States using a state-wide prescription database and studied trends three years before and after the policy change, focusing on certain specialties. METHODS: We used Ohio's state prescription drug monitoring program database, which includes all filled schedule II and III prescriptions regardless of payer or pharmacy, to conduct an interrupted time series analysis of the nine most prescribed opioids: hydrocodone, oxycodone, tramadol, codeine, and others. We analyzed hydrocodone prescribing trends for the physician specialties of internal medicine, anesthesiology, and emergency medicine. We evaluated trends 37 months before and after the rescheduling change. RESULTS: Rescheduling was associated with a hydrocodone level change of -26,358 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -36,700 to -16,016) prescriptions (-5.8%) and an additional decrease in prescriptions of -1,568 (95% CI = -2,296 to -839) per month (-0.8%). Codeine prescribing temporarily increased, at a level change of 6,304 (95% CI = 3,003 to 9,606) prescriptions (18.5%), indicating a substitution effect. Hydrocodone prescriptions by specialty were associated with a level change of -805 (95% CI = -1,280 to -330) prescriptions (-8.5%) for anesthesiologists and a level change of -14,619 (95% CI = -23,710 to -5,528) prescriptions (-10.2%) for internists. There was no effect on prescriptions by emergency physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 federal rescheduling of hydrocodone was associated with declines in hydrocodone prescriptions in Ohio beyond what had already been occurring, and hydrocodone may have been briefly substituted with codeine. These results indicate that rescheduling did have a lasting effect but affected prescribing specialties variably.

Association of Emergency Clinicians' Assessment of Mortality Risk With Actual 1-Month Mortality Among Older Adults Admitted to the Hospital.

Importance: The accuracy of mortality assessment by emergency clinicians is unknown and may affect subsequent medical decision-making. Objective: To determine the association of the question, "Would you be surprised if your patient died in the next one month?" (known as the surprise question) asked of emergency clinicians with actual 1-month mortality among undifferentiated older adults who visited the emergency department (ED). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study at a single academic medical center in Portland, Maine, included consecutive patients 65 years or older who received care in the ED and were subsequently admitted to the hospital from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015. Data analyses were conducted from January 2018 to March 2019. Exposures: Treating emergency clinicians were required to answer the surprise question, "Would you be surprised if your patient died in the next one month?" in the electronic medical record when placing a bed request for all patients who were being admitted to the hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mortality at 1 month, assessed from the National Death Index. The secondary outcomes included accuracies of responses by both emergency clinicians and admitting internal medicine clinicians to the surprise question in identifying older patients with high 6-month and 12-month mortality. Results: The full cohort included 10 737 older adults (mean [SD] age, 75.9 [8.8] years; 5532 [52%] women; 10 157 [94.6%] white) in 16 223 visits treated in the ED and admitted to the hospital. There were 5132 patients (31.6%) with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 2 or more. Mortality rates were 8.3% at 1 month, 17.2% at 6 months, and 22.5% at 12 months. Emergency clinicians stated that they would not be surprised if the patient died in the next month for 2104 patients (19.6%). In multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, race, admission diagnosis, and comorbid conditions, the odds of death at 1 month were higher in patients for whom clinicians answered that they would not be surprised if the patient died in the next 1 month compared with patients for whom clinicians answered that they would be surprised if the patient died in the next 1 month (odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI, 2.2-2.7]; P < .001). However, the diagnostic test characteristics of the surprise question were poor (sensitivity, 20%; specificity, 93%; positive predictive value, 43%; negative predictive value, 82%; accuracy, 78%; area under the receiver operating curve of the multivariable model, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.72-0.74; P < .001]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that asking the surprise question of emergency clinicians may be a valuable tool to identify older patients in the ED with a high risk of 1-month mortality. The effect of implementing the surprise question to improve population-level health care for older adults in the ED who are seriously ill remains to be seen.

Association of Physician Organization-Affiliated Political Action Committee Contributions With US House of Representatives and Senate Candidates' Stances on Firearm Regulation.

Importance: Many physician professional organizations have endorsed public policies, such as expanded background checks, to reduce firearm-related injury. It is not known whether physician organizations' political giving aligns with these policy endorsements. Objectives: To compare physician organization-affiliated political action committee (PAC) campaign contributions with US House of Representatives and Senate candidates' stances on firearm safety policies and analyze whether physician organization endorsement of firearm safety policies is associated with contribution patterns. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study compared contributions from the 25 largest physician organization-affiliated PACs during the 2016 election cycle (January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016) with US House of Representatives and Senate candidate support for firearm regulation. Physician organization endorsement of firearm safety policies was defined by endorsement of the 2015 Firearm-Related Injury and Death in the United States: A Call to Action From 8 Health Professional Organizations and the American Bar Association. Main Outcomes and Measures: Contributions to US House of Representatives and Senate candidates by stance on firearm safety legislation measured by (1) voting history on US Senate Amendment (SA) 4750, which proposed background check expansion; (2) cosponsorship of US House Resolution (HR) 1217, which sought to expand background checks and strengthen the national criminal background check system; and (3) an A rating (vs not A) by the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF), a measure of overall candidate support for firearm regulation. Results: This study examined the 25 largest physician organization-affiliated PACs during the 2016 election cycle. Twenty of 25 PACs (80%) contributed more in total to incumbent Senate candidates who voted against SA 4750 (n = 21) than to those who voted for it (n = 8), and 24 of 25 PACs (96%) contributed more in total to incumbent US House of Representatives candidates who did not cosponsor HR 1217 (n = 227) than to those who cosponsored it (n = 166). A total of 21 of 25 PACs (84%) contributed more total dollars to US House of Representatives and Senate candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF (n = 386) than to those not rated A (n = 546). Twenty-four of 25 PACs (96%) contributed to a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF than candidates not rated A. Among PACs whose affiliated organizations endorsed the Call to Action, 8 of 9 (89%) supported a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF than candidates not rated A, whereas 16 of 16 PACs affiliated with nonendorsing organizations supported a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF. After adjustment for other political factors, the 9 PACs that endorsed the Call to Action had a lower likelihood of donating to NRA-PVF A-rated candidates compared with PACs that did not endorse the Call to Action (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-0.99; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: Physician organization-affiliated PACs included in this study donated more funds to more US House of Representatives and Senate candidates who oppose firearm safety policies than to candidates in support of such policies. Although endorsement of the Call to Action was associated with a lower likelihood of donating to candidates who oppose firearm safety policies, the overall pattern was not consistent with professional societies' advocacy for firearm safety.

The Impact of Conversion From an Urgent Care Center to a Freestanding Emergency Department on Patient Population, Conditions Managed, and Reimbursement.

BACKGROUND: Freestanding emergency departments (FSEDs), EDs not attached to acute care hospitals, are expanding. One key question is whether FSEDs are more similar to higher-cost hospital-based EDs or to lower-cost urgent care centers (UCCs). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine whether there was a change in patient population, conditions managed, and reimbursement among three facilities that converted from a UCC to an FSED. METHODS: Using insurance claims from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas, we compared outcomes of interest for three facilities that converted from a UCC to an FSED for 1 year before and after conversion. RESULTS: There was no significant change in age, sex, and comorbidities among patients treated after conversion. Conditions were similar after conversion, though there was a small increase in visits for potentially more severe conditions. For example, the most common diagnoses before and after conversion were upper respiratory infections (42.8% of UCC visits, 26.0% of FSED visits), while chest pain increased from rank 30 to 10 (0.5% of UCC visits, 2.3% of FSED visits). Yearly number of visits decreased after conversion, while median reimbursement per visit increased (facility A: $148 to $2,153; facility B: $137 to $1,466; and facility C: $131 to $1,925) and total revenue increased (facility A: $1,389,590 to $1,486,203; facility B: $896,591 to $4,294,636; and facility C: $637,585 to $8,429,828). CONCLUSIONS: After three UCCs converted to FSEDs, patient volume decreased and reimbursement per visit increased, despite no change in patient characteristics and little change in conditions managed. These case studies suggest that some FSEDs are similar to UCCs in patient mix and conditions treated.

Anonymity Decreases the Punitive Nature of a Departmental Morbidity and Mortality Conference.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to analyze the effect of an anonymous morbidity and mortality (M&M) conference on participants' attitudes toward the educational and punitive nature of the conference. We theorized that an anonymous conference might be more educational, less punitive, and would shift analysis of cases toward systems-based analysis and away from individual cognitive errors. METHODS: We implemented an anonymous M&M conference at an academic emergency medicine program. Using a pre-post design, we assessed attitudes toward the educational and punitive nature of the conference as well as the perceived focus on systems versus individual errors analyzed during the conference. Means and standard deviations were compared using a paired t test. RESULTS: Fifteen conferences were held during the study period and 53 cases were presented. Sixty percent of eligible participants (n = 38) completed both the pretest and posttest assessments. There was no difference in the perceived educational value of the conference (4.42 versus 4.37, P = 0.661), but the conference was perceived to be less punitive (2.08 versus 1.76, P = 0.017). There was no difference between the perceived focus of the conference on systems (2.76 versus 2.76, P = 1.00) versus individual (4.21 versus 4.16, P = 0.644) errors. Most participants (59.5%) preferred that the conference remain anonymous. CONCLUSIONS: We assessed the effect of anonymity in our departmental M&M conference for a 7-month period and found no difference in the perceived effect of M&M on the educational nature of the conference but found a small improvement in the punitive nature of the conference.

Trends in Visits to Acute Care Venues for Treatment of Low-Acuity Conditions in the United States From 2008 to 2015.

Importance: Over the past 2 decades, a variety of new care options have emerged for acute care, including urgent care centers, retail clinics, and telemedicine. Trends in the utilization of these newer care venues and the emergency department (ED) have not been characterized. Objective: To describe trends in visits to different acute care venues, including urgent care centers, retail clinics, telemedicine, and EDs, with a focus on visits for treatment of low-acuity conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used deidentified health plan claims data from Aetna, a large, national, commercial health plan, from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2015, with approximately 20 million insured members per study year. Descriptive analysis was performed for health plan members younger than 65 years. Data analysis was performed from December 28, 2016, to February 20, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utilization, inflation-adjusted price, and spending associated with visits for treatment of low-acuity conditions. Low-acuity conditions were identified using diagnosis codes and included acute respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, rashes, and musculoskeletal strains. Results: This study included 20.6 million acute care visits for treatment of low-acuity conditions over the 8-year period. Visits to the ED for the treatment of low-acuity conditions decreased by 36% (from 89 visits per 1000 members in 2008 to 57 visits per 1000 members in 2015), whereas use of non-ED venues increased by 140% (from 54 visits per 1000 members in 2008 to 131 visits per 1000 members in 2015). There was an increase in visits to all non-ED venues: urgent care centers (119% increase, from 47 visits per 1000 members in 2008 to 103 visits per 1000 members in 2015), retail clinics (214% increase, from 7 visits per 1000 members in 2008 to 22 visits per 1000 members in 2015), and telemedicine (from 0 visits in 2008 to 6 visits per 1000 members in 2015). Utilization and spending per person per year for low-acuity conditions had net increases of 31% (from 143 visits per 1000 members in 2008 to 188 visits per 1000 members in 2015) and 14% ($70 per member in 2008 to $80 per member in 2015), respectively. The increase in spending was primarily driven by a 79% increase in price per ED visit for treatment of low-acuity conditions (from $914 per visit in 2008 to $1637 per visit in 2015). Conclusions and Relevance: From 2008 to 2015, total acute care utilization for the treatment of low-acuity conditions and associated spending per member increased, and utilization of non-ED acute care venues increased rapidly. These findings suggest that patients are more likely to visit urgent care centers than EDs for the treatment of low-acuity conditions.

Analysis of a Commercial Insurance Policy to Deny Coverage for Emergency Department Visits With Nonemergent Diagnoses.

Importance: Insurers have increasingly adopted policies to reduce emergency department (ED) visits that they consider unnecessary. One common approach is to retrospectively deny coverage if the ED discharge diagnosis is determined by the insurer to be nonemergent. Objective: To characterize ED visits that may be denied coverage if the ED coverage denial policy of a large national insurer, Anthem, Inc, is widely adopted. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of probability-sampled ED visits from the nationally representative National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey ED subsample occurring from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015, was conducted. Visits by commercially insured patients aged 15 to 64 years were examined. Those with ED discharge diagnoses defined by Anthem's policy as nonemergent and therefore subject to possible denial of coverage were classified as denial diagnosis visits. The primary presenting symptoms among denial diagnosis visits were identified, and all visits by commercially insured adults presenting with these primary symptoms were classified as denial symptom visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: Each visit cohort as a weighted proportion of commercially insured adult ED visits. The proportion of each visit cohort that received ED-level care, defined as visits where patients were triaged as urgent or emergent, received 2 or more diagnostic tests, or were admitted or transferred, was also examined. Results: From 2011 to 2015, 15.7% (95% CI, 15.0%-16.4%) of commercially insured adult ED visits (4440 of 28 304) were denial diagnosis visits (mean [SD] patient age, 36.6 [14.0] years; 2592 [58.7%] female and 2962 [63.5%] white). Among these visits, 39.7% (95% CI, 37.1%-42.3%) received ED-level care: 24.5% (95% CI, 21.7%-27.4%) were initially triaged as urgent or emergent and 26.0% (95% CI, 23.8%-28.3%) received 2 or more diagnostic tests. These denial diagnosis visits shared the same presenting symptoms as 87.9% (95% CI, 87.3%-88.4%) of commercially insured adult ED visits (24 882 of 28 304) (mean [SD] patient age, 38.5 [14.1] years; 14 362 [57.9%] female and 17 483 [68.7%] white). Among these denial symptom visits, 65.1% (95% CI, 63.4%-66.9%) received ED-level care: 43.2% (95% CI, 40.2%-46.4%) were triaged as urgent or emergent, 51.9% (95% CI, 50.0%-53.9%) received 2 or more diagnostic tests, and 9.7% (95% CI, 8.8%-10.6%) were admitted or transferred. Conclusions and Relevance: Anthem's nonemergent ED discharge diagnoses were not associated with identification of unnecessary ED visits when assessed from the patient's perspective. This cost-reduction policy could place many patients who reasonably seek ED care at risk of coverage denial.

Assessment of Patient-Centered Approaches to Collect Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Information in the Emergency Department: The EQUALITY Study.

Importance: Health care and government organizations call for routine collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) information in the clinical setting, yet patient preferences for collection methods remain unknown. Objective: To assess of the optimal patient-centered approach for SOGI collection in the emergency department (ED) setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: This matched cohort study (Emergency Department Query for Patient-Centered Approaches to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity [EQUALITY] Study) of 4 EDs on the east coast of the United States sequentially tested 2 different SOGI collection approaches between February 2016 and March 2017. Multivariable ordered logistic regression was used to assess whether either SOGI collection method was associated with higher patient satisfaction with their ED experience. Eligible adults older than 18 years who identified as a sexual or gender minority (SGM) were enrolled and then matched 1 to 1 by age (aged ≥5 years) and illness severity (Emergency Severity Index score ±1) to patients who identified as heterosexual and cisgender (non-SGM), and to patients whose SOGI information was missing (blank field). Patients who identified as SGM, non-SGM, or had a blank field were invited to complete surveys about their ED visit. Data analysis was conducted from April 2017 to November 2017. Interventions: Two SOGI collection approaches were tested: nurse verbal collection during the clinical encounter vs nonverbal collection during patient registration. The ED physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and registrars received education and training on sexual or gender minority health disparities and terminology prior to and throughout the intervention period. Main Outcomes and Measures: A detailed survey, developed with input of a stakeholder advisory board, which included a modified Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit score and additional patient satisfaction measures. Results: A total of 540 enrolled patients were analyzed; the mean age was 36.4 years and 66.5% of those who identified their gender were female. Sexual or gender minority patients had significantly better Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit scores with nonverbal registrar form collection compared with nurse verbal collection (mean [SD], 95.6 [11.9] vs 89.5 [20.5]; P = .03). No significant differences between the 2 approaches were found among non-SGM patients (mean [SD], 91.8 [18.9] vs 93.2 [13.6]; P = .59) or those with a blank field (92.7 [15.9] vs 93.6 [14.7]; P = .70). After adjusting for age, race, illness severity, and site, SGM patients had 2.57 (95% CI, 1.13-5.82) increased odds of a better Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit score category during form collection compared with verbal collection. Conclusions and Relevance: Sexual or gender minority patients reported greater comfort and improved communication when SOGI was collected via nonverbal self-report. Registrar form collection was the optimal patient-centered method for collecting SOGI information in the ED.

Opioid Prescriptions by Specialty in Ohio, 2010-2014.

Background: The current US opioid epidemic is attributed to the large volume of prescribed opioids. This study analyzed the contribution of different medical specialties to overall opioids by evaluating the pill counts and morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) of opioid prescriptions, stratified by provider specialty, and determined temporal trends. Methods: This was an analysis of the Ohio prescription drug monitoring program database, which captures scheduled medication prescriptions filled in the state as well as prescriber specialty. We extracted prescriptions for pill versions of opioids written in the calendar years 2010 to 2014. The main outcomes were the number of filled prescriptions, pill counts, MMEs, and extended-released opioids written by physicians in each specialty, and annual prescribing trends. Results: There were 56,873,719 prescriptions for the studied opioids dispensed, for which 41,959,581 (73.8%) had prescriber specialty type available. Mean number of pills per prescription and MMEs were highest for physical medicine/rehabilitation (PM&R; 91.2 pills, 1,532 mg, N = 1,680,579), anesthesiology/pain (89.3 pills, 1,484 mg, N = 3,261,449), hematology/oncology (88.2 pills, 1,534 mg, N = 516,596), and neurology (84.4 pills, 1,230 mg, N = 573,389). Family medicine (21.8%) and internal medicine (17.6%) wrote the most opioid prescriptions overall. Time trends in the average number of pills and MMEs per prescription also varied depending on specialty. Conclusions: The numbers of pills and MMEs per opioid prescription vary markedly by prescriber specialty, as do trends in prescribing characteristics. Pill count and MME values define each specialty's contribution to overall opioid prescribing more accurately than the number of prescriptions alone.

ED-based care coordination reduces costs for frequent ED users.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated a pilot quality improvement intervention implemented in an urban academic medical center emergency department (ED) to improve care coordination and reduce ED visits and hospitalizations among frequent ED users. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We identified the most frequent ED users in both the 30 days prior to the intervention and the 12 months prior to the intervention. We randomized the top 72 patients to receive either our pilot intervention or usual care. The intervention consisted of a community health worker who assisted patients with navigating care and identifying unmet social needs and an ED-based clinical team that developed interdisciplinary acute care plans for eligible patients. After 7 months, we analyzed ED visits, hospitalizations, and costs for the intervention and control groups. RESULTS: We randomized 72 patients to the intervention (n = 36) and control (n = 36) groups. Patients randomized to the intervention group had 35% fewer ED visits (P = .10) and 31% fewer admissions from the ED (P = .20) compared with the control group. Average ED direct costs per patient were 15% lower and average inpatient direct costs per patient were 8% lower for intervention patients compared with control patients. CONCLUSIONS: ED-based care coordination is a promising approach to reduce ED use and hospitalizations among frequent ED users. Our program also demonstrated a decrease in costs per patient. Future efforts to promote population health and control costs may benefit from incorporating similar programs into acute care delivery systems.