Assessment of physician compliance to the CAEP 2021 Atrial Fibrillation Best Practices Checklist for rate and rhythm control in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Acute atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF/AFL) are common arrhythmias treated in the emergency department (ED). The 2021 CAEP Best Practices Checklist provides clear recommendations for management of patients with acute AF/AFL. This study aimed to evaluate physician compliance to Checklist recommendations for risk assessment and ED management of AF/AFL. METHODS: This health records review assessed the management of adult patients presenting to two tertiary care EDs for management of acute AF/AFL from January to August, 2022. All ECGs demonstrating AF/AFL with a heart rate greater than 100 were compiled to capture primary and secondary causes. All visits were assessed for rate and rhythm control management, adverse events, return to ED, and safety criteria. Study physicians classified safety criteria from the Checklist into high and moderate concerns. The primary outcome was the proportion of cases with safety concerns and adverse events occurring during management in the ED. Data were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We included 429 patients with a mean age of 67.7 years and 57.1% male. ED management included rate control (20.4%), electrical (40.1%), and pharmacological (20.1%) cardioversion. Adverse events occurred in 9.5% of cases: 12.5% in rate control, 13.4% in electrical cardioversion, and 6.9% in pharmacologic cardioversion. Overall, 7.9% of cases had management safety concerns. Moderate safety concerns occurred in 4.9% of cases including failure to attain recommended heart rate at time of discharge (3.9%). Severe concerns were identified in 3.0% of cases including failure to cardiovert unstable patients (1.2%). The 30-day return-to-ED rate was 16.5% secondary to AF/AFL. CONCLUSION: ED management of AF/AFL was consistent with the CAEP Checklist and was safe overall. Opportunities for optimizing care include attaining recommended targets during rate control, avoidance of calcium channel and beta blockers in patients with systolic dysfunction, and earlier cardioversion for clinically unstable patients.

ABSTRAIT: OBJECTIFS: La fibrillation auriculaire aiguë et le flutter (FA/FAT) sont des arythmies courantes traitées aux urgences (SU). La liste de vérification des pratiques exemplaires 2021 du CAEP fournit des recommandations claires pour la prise en charge des patients atteints de FA/FAT aiguës. Cette étude visait à évaluer la conformité des médecins aux recommandations de la liste de contrôle pour l'évaluation des risques et la gestion de la FA/FAT. MéTHODES: Cet examen des dossiers de santé a évalué la prise en charge des patients adultes qui se sont présentés à deux urgences de soins tertiaires pour la prise en charge des FA/FAT aiguës de janvier à août 2022. Tous les ECG démontrant une FA/FAT avec une fréquence cardiaque supérieure à 100 ont été compilés pour capturer les causes primaires et secondaires. Toutes les visites ont été évaluées pour la gestion du contrôle des taux et du rythme, les événements indésirables, le retour à l'urgence et les critères de sécurité. Les médecins de l'étude ont classé les critères d'innocuité de la liste de contrôle en préoccupations élevées et modérées. Le résultat principal était la proportion de cas présentant des préoccupations en matière de sécurité et des événements indésirables survenant pendant la prise en charge à l'urgence. Les données ont été analysées à l'aide de statistiques descriptives simples. RéSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 429 patients avec un âge moyen de 67.7 ans et 57.1% d'hommes. La prise en charge de l'urgence comprenait une cardioversion contrôlée (20.4 %), électrique (40.1 %) et pharmacologique (20.1 %). Des événements indésirables se sont produits dans 9.5% des cas : 12.5% dans le contrôle du taux, 13.4% dans la cardioversion électrique et 6.9% dans la cardioversion pharmacologique. Dans l'ensemble, 7.9 % des cas concernaient la sécurité de la direction. Des problèmes de sécurité modérés sont survenus dans 4.9 % des cas, y compris l'incapacité d'atteindre la fréquence cardiaque recommandée au moment du congé (3.9 %). Des préoccupations graves ont été identifiées dans 3.0 % des cas, y compris l'échec à cardiovert patients instables (1.2 %). Le taux de retour aux urgences après 30 jours était de 16,5 % secondaire aux FA/FAT. CONCLUSION: La gestion de l'AF/AFL par le DG était conforme à la liste de vérification du CAEP et était sécuritaire dans l'ensemble. Les possibilités d'optimisation des soins comprennent l'atteinte des cibles recommandées lors du contrôle des taux, l'évitement du canal calcique et des bêtabloquants chez les patients présentant une dysfonction systolique et une cardioversion antérieure pour les patients cliniquement instables.

Emergency physician risk assessment practices prior to prescribing opioids.

BACKGROUND: Safer opioid prescribing remains a crucial issue for emergency physicians. Policy statements and guidelines recommend deliberate risk assessment for likelihood of current or future opioid use disorder prior to prescribing opioids. However, the practice patterns of emergency physicians remain underreported. METHODS: We surveyed emergency physicians across Canada about their local opioid prescribing policies, their practice patterns of risk assessment prior to prescribing opioids, and which clinical risk factors they find most important. RESULTS: The response rate was 20.4% (n = 312/1532). 59.8% of respondents report usually or always assessing for risk. Physicians rely on gestalt (80.3%), targeted histories based on risk factors in the literature (55.6%) or their experience (57.6%), and reviewing medical (83.1%) and medication records (75.6%). Contacting primary prescribers is uncommon (16.3%). A minority routinely use opioid prescribing risk assessment tools (6.4%), have local opioid prescribing policies (27%), or make use of electronic medical record functions to assist risk stratifying (2.4%). CONCLUSION: Many Canadian emergency physicians make risk assessments based on gestalt rather than identifying literature-based risk factors. This conflicts with guidelines calling for routine comprehensive assessment. Further efforts should be directed towards education in optimizing risk assessment; and towards system-level initiatives such as clear local prescribing policies, electronic-systems functionality, and developing assessment tools for use in the ED.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La prescription sûre d'opioïdes reste un enjeu essentiel pour les médecins d'urgence. Avant de prescrire des opioïdes, les énoncés de politique et les lignes directrices recommandent une évaluation des risques bien réfléchie pour la probabilité d'un abus d'opiacé actuel ou éventuel. Cependant, les modalités de pratique des médecins urgentistes font l'objet d'une documentation et d'une information insuffisante. MéTHODES: Nous avons mené une enquête auprès des médecins urgentistes partout au Canada au sujet de leurs politiques locales de prescription des opioïdes, de leurs modalités de pratique d'évaluation des risques avant de prescrire des opioïdes, et des facteurs de risque cliniques qu'ils jugent les plus importants. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse était de 20.4% (n = 312/1532). 59.8% des répondants déclarent évaluer habituellement ou toujours le risque. Les médecins dépendent du gestalt (80.3%), des antécédents ciblés basés sur des facteurs de risque de la littérature (55.6%) ou de leur expérience (57.6%) et d'une examination des dossiers médicaux (83.1%) et des dossiers pharmaceutiques (75.6%). Il est rare de contacter les principaux prescripteurs (16.3%). Une minorité utilise régulièrement des outils d'évaluation des risques liés à la prescription des opioïdes (6.4%), dispose de politiques locales de prescription d'opiacés (27%) ou utilise les fonctions de dossier médical électronique pour aider à la stratification des risques (2.4%). CONCLUSION: De nombreux médecins urgentistes canadiens évaluent les risques en se basant sur la gestalt plutôt que sur l'identification des facteurs de risque documentés. Cela est en contradiction avec les directives exigeant une évaluation complète de routine. Des efforts supplémentaires devraient être dirigés vers l'éducation pour optimiser l'évaluation des risques; et vers des initiatives au niveau du système telles que des politiques de prescription locales claires, la fonctionnalité des systèmes électroniques et l'élaboration d'outils d'évaluation à utiliser aux urgences.

An environmental scan of emergency medicine research support, training, and infrastructure across Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Our study objective was to describe the Canadian emergency medicine (EM) research community landscape prior to the initiation of a nationwide network. METHODS: A two-phase electronic survey was sent to 17 Canadian medical schools. The Phase 1 Environmental Scan was administered to department chairs/hospital EM chiefs, to identify EM physicians conducting clinical or educational research. The Phase 2 Survey was sent to the identified EM researchers to assess four themes: 1) geographic distribution, 2) training/career satisfaction, 3) time/financial compensation, and 4) research facilitators/barriers. Descriptive analyses were conducted, and results were stratified by Canadian regions. RESULTS: A total of 92 EM researchers were identified in Phase 1; 67 (73%) responded to the Phase 2 Survey. Of those, 42 (63%) reported being clinical researchers, and 19 (45%) had a graduate degree. Three provinces encompassed most of the researchers (n = 35). Of the respondents, 61% had a research degree, 66% felt adequately trained for their research career, 73% had financial support, 83% had access to office spaces, 52% had no mentor during their first years of their career, 69% felt satisfied with their research career, and 82% suggested that they will still be conducting research in 5 years. CONCLUSION: EM researchers reported being adequately trained, even though only a little over half had a graduate degree. Only two-thirds had financial support, and mentorship was lacking in one-third of the participants. Not all respondents had a form of infrastructure, but most felt optimistic about their careers. The Canadian EM research environment could be improved to ensure better research capacity.

Pragmatic Strategy Empowering Paramedics to Assess Low-Risk Trauma Patients With the Canadian C-Spine Rule and Selectively Transport Them Without Immobilization: Protocol for a Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Each year, half a million patients with a potential neck (c-spine) injury are transported to Ontario emergency departments (EDs). Less than 1.0% (1/100) of these patients have a neck bone fracture. Even less (1/200, 0.5%) have a spinal cord injury or nerve damage. Currently, paramedics transport all trauma victims (with or without an injury) by ambulance using a backboard, cervical collar, and head immobilizers. Importantly, prolonged immobilization is often unnecessary; it causes patient discomfort and pain, decreases community access to paramedics, contributes to ED crowding, and is very costly. We therefore developed the Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) for alert and stable trauma patients. This decision rule helps ED physicians and triage nurses to safely and selectively remove immobilization, without x-rays and missed injury. We successfully taught Ottawa paramedics to use the CCR in the field in a single-center study. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to improve patient care and health system efficiency and outcomes by allowing paramedics to assess eligible low-risk trauma patients with the CCR and selectively transport them without immobilization to the ED. METHODS: We propose a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized design with health economic evaluation, designed collaboratively with knowledge users. Our 36-month study will consist of a 12-month setup and training period (year 1), followed by the stepped-wedge trial (year 2) and a 12-month period for study completion, analyses, and knowledge translation. A total of 12 Ontario paramedic services of various sizes distributed across the province will be randomly allocated to one of three sequences. Paramedic services in each sequence will cross from the control condition (usual care) to the intervention condition (CCR implementation) at intervals of 3 months until all communities have crossed to the intervention. Data will be collected on all eligible patients in each paramedic service for a total duration of 12 months. A major strength of our design is that each community will have implemented the CCR by the end of the study. RESULTS: Interim results are expected in December 2019 and final results in 2020. If this multicenter trial is successful, we expect the Ontario Ministry of Health will recommend that paramedics evaluate all eligible patients with the CCR in the Province of Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: We conservatively estimate that in Ontario, more than 60% of all eligible trauma patients (300,000 annually) could be transported safely and comfortably, without c-spine immobilization devices. This will significantly reduce patient pain and discomfort, paramedic intervention times, and ED length of stay, thereby improving access to paramedics and ED care. This could be achieved rapidly and with lower health care costs compared with current practices (possible cost saving of Can $36 [US $25] per immobilization or Can $10,656,000 [US $7,335,231] per year). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02786966; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02786966. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/16966.

Development of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score to predict serious adverse events after emergency department assessment of syncope.

BACKGROUND: Syncope can be caused by serious conditions not evident during initial evaluation, which can lead to serious adverse events, including death, after disposition from the emergency department. We sought to develop a clinical decision tool to identify adult patients with syncope who are at risk of a serious adverse event within 30 days after disposition from the emergency department. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled adults (age ≥ 16 yr) with syncope who presented within 24 hours after the event to 1 of 6 large emergency departments from Sept. 29, 2010, to Feb. 27, 2014. We collected standardized variables at index presentation from clinical evaluation and investigations. Adjudicated serious adverse events included death, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, structural heart disease, pulmonary embolism, serious hemorrhage and procedural interventions within 30 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 4030 patients with syncope; the mean age was 53.6 years, 55.5% were women, and 9.5% were admitted to hospital. Serious adverse events occurred in 147 (3.6%) of the patients within 30 days after disposition from the emergency department. Of 43 candidate predictors examined, we included 9 in the final model: predisposition to vasovagal syncope, heart disease, any systolic pressure reading in the emergency department < 90 or > 180 mm Hg, troponin level above 99th percentile for the normal population, abnormal QRS axis (< -30° or > 100°), QRS duration longer than 130 ms, QTc interval longer than 480 ms, emergency department diagnosis of cardiac syncope and emergency department diagnosis of vasovagal syncope (C statistic 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.90; optimism 0.015; goodness-of-fit p = 0.11). The risk of a serious adverse event within 30 days ranged from 0.4% for a score of -3 to 83.6% for a score of 11. The sensitivity was 99.2% (95% CI 95.9%-100%) for a threshold score of -2 or higher and 97.7% (95% CI 93.5%-99.5%) for a threshold score of -1 or higher. INTERPRETATION: The Canadian Syncope Risk Score showed good discrimination and calibration for 30-day risk of serious adverse events after disposition from the emergency department. Once validated, the tool will be able to accurately stratify the risk of serious adverse events among patients presenting with syncope, including those at low risk who can be discharged home quickly.

CAEP 2015 Academic Symposium: Current State and Recommendations to Achieve Adequate and Sustainable Funding for Emergency Medicine Academic Units.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the current state of academic emergency medicine (EM) funding in Canada and develop recommendations to grow and establish sustainable funding. METHODS: A panel of eight leaders from different EM academic units was assembled. Using mixed methods (including a literature review, sharing of professional experiences, a survey of current EM academic heads, and data previously collected from an environmental scan), 10 recommendations were drafted and presented at an academic symposium. Attendee feedback was incorporated, and the second set of draft recommendations was further distributed to the Canadian Association Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Section for additional comments before being finalized. RESULTS: Recommendations were developed around the funding challenges identified and solutions developed by academic EM university-based units across Canada. A strategic plan was seen as integral to achieving strong funding of an EM unit, especially when it aligned with departmental and institutional priorities. A business plan, although occasionally overlooked, was deemed an important component for planning and sustaining the academic mission. A number of recommendations surrounding philanthropy consisted of creating partnerships with existing foundations and engaging multiple stakeholders and communities. Synergy between academic and clinical EM departments was also viewed as an opportunity to ensure integration of common missions. Education and networking for current and future leaders were also viewed as invaluable to ensure that opportunities are optimized through strong leadership development and shared experiences to further the EM academic missions across the country. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations were designed to improve the financial circumstances for many Canadian EM units. There is a considerable wealth of resources that can contribute to financial stability for an academic unit, and an annual networking meeting and continuing education on these issues will facilitate more rapid implementation of these recommendations.

CAEP 2014 Academic symposium: "How to make research succeed in your department: How to fund your research program".

OBJECTIVE: We sought to gather a comprehensive list of funding strategies and opportunities for emergency medicine (EM) centres across Canada, and make recommendations on how to successfully fund all levels of research activity, including research projects, staff salaries, infrastructure, and researcher stipends. METHODS: We formed an expert panel consisting of volunteers recognized nationally for their scholarly work in EM. First, we conducted interviews with academic leaders and researchers to obtain a description of their local funding strategies using a standardized open-ended questionnaire. Panelists then identified emerging funding models. Second, we listed funding opportunities and initiatives at the provincial, national, and international levels. Finally, we used an iterative consensus-based approach to derive pragmatic recommendations after incorporating comments and suggestions from participants at an academic symposium. RESULTS: Our review of funding strategies identified four funding models: 1) investigator dependent model, 2) practice plan, 3) generous benefactor, and 4) mixed funding. Recommendations in this document include approaches for research contributors and producers (seven recommendations), for local academic leaders (five recommendations), and for national organizations, such as the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) (three recommendations). CONCLUSIONS: Funding for research in EM varies across Canada and is largely insecure. We offer recommendations to help facilitate funding for large and small projects, for salary support, and for local and national leaders to advance EM research. We believe that these recommendations will increase funding for all levels of EM research activity, including research projects, staff salaries, infrastructure, and researcher stipends.

A prospective cohort study of patients with transient ischemic attack to identify high-risk clinical characteristics.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The occurrence of a transient ischemic attack (TIA) increases an individual's risk for subsequent stroke. The objectives of this study were to determine clinical features of patients with TIA associated with impending (≤7 days) stroke and to develop a clinical prediction score for impending stroke. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study at 8 Canadian emergency departments for 5 years. We enrolled patients with a new TIA. Our outcome was subsequent stroke within 7 days of TIA diagnosis. RESULTS: We prospectively enrolled 3906 patients, of which 86 (2.2%) experienced a stroke within 7 days. Clinical features strongly correlated with having an impending stroke included first-ever TIA, language disturbance, longer duration, weakness, gait disturbance, elevated blood pressure, atrial fibrillation on ECG, infarction on computed tomography, and elevated blood glucose. Variables less associated with having an impending stroke included vertigo, lightheadedness, and visual loss. From this cohort, we derived the Canadian TIA Score which identifies the risk of subsequent stroke≤7 days and consists of 13 variables. This model has good discrimination with a c-statistic of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with TIA with their first TIA, language disturbance, duration of symptoms≥10 minutes, gait disturbance, atrial fibrillation, infarction on computed tomography, elevated platelets or glucose, unilateral weakness, history of carotid stenosis, and elevated diastolic blood pressure are at higher risk for an impending stroke. Patients with vertigo and no high-risk features are at low risk. The Canadian TIA Score quantifies the impending stroke risk following TIA.

Assessment of the impact on time to complete medical record using an electronic medical record versus a paper record on emergency department patients: a study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic medical records are becoming an integral part of healthcare delivery. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare paper documentation versus electronic medical record for non-traumatic chest pain to determine differences in time for physicians to complete medical records using paper versus electronic mediums. We also assessed physician satisfaction with the electronic format. METHODS: We conducted this before-after study in a single large tertiary care academic emergency department. In the 'Before Period', stopwatches determined the time for paper medical recording. In the 'After Period', a template-based electronic medical record was introduced and the time for electronic recording was measured. The time to record in the before and after periods were compared using a two-sided t test. We surveyed physicians to assess satisfaction. RESULTS: We enrolled 100 non-traumatic patients with chest pain in the before period and 73 in the after period. The documentation time was longer using electronic charting, (9.6±5.9 min vs 6.1±2.5 min; p<0.001). 18 of 20 physicians participating in the after period completed surveys. Physicians were not satisfied with the electronic patient recording for non-traumatic chest pain. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that we are aware of which compared paper versus electronic medical records in the emergency department. Electronic recording took longer than paper records. Physicians were not satisfied using this electronic record. Given the time pressures on emergency physicians, a solution to minimise the charting time using electronic medical records must be found before widespread uptake of electronic charting will be possible.

Survey of emergency physicians' requirements for a clinical decision rule for acute respiratory illnesses in three countries.

UNLABELLED: ABSTRACTObjective:There are currently no widely used guidelines to determine which older patients with acute respiratory conditions require hospital admission. This study assessed the need for clinical decision rules to help determine whether hospital admission is required for patients over 50 years for three common respiratory conditions: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart failure (HF), and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). DESIGN: Postal survey. SETTING: Emergency physicians (EPs) from the United States, Canada, and Australasia. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of EPs from the United States, Canada, and Australasia. INTERVENTIONS: A modified Dillman technique with a prenotification letter and up to three postal surveys. MAIN OUTCOMES: EP opinions regarding the need for and willingness to use clinical decision rules for emergency department (ED) patients over 50 years with COPD, HF, or CAP to predict hospital admission. We assessed the required sensitivity of each rule for return ED visit or death within 14 days. RESULTS: A total of 801 responses from 1,493 surveys were received, with response rates of 55%, 60%, and 46% for Australasia, Canada, and the United States, respectively. Over 90% of EPs reported that they would consider using clinical decision rules for HF, CAP, and COPD. The median required sensitivity for death within 14 days was 97 to 98% for all conditions. CONCLUSIONS: EPs are likely to adopt highly sensitive clinical decision rules to predict the need for hospital admission for patients over 50 years with COPD, HF, or CAP.

The Chest Pain Choice trial: a pilot randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with chest pain in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain is a common presenting complaint in the emergency department (ED). Despite the frequency with which clinicians evaluate patients with chest pain, accurately determining the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and sharing risk information with patients is challenging. The aims of this study are (1) to develop a decision aid (CHEST PAIN CHOICE) that communicates the short-term risk of ACS and (2) to evaluate the impact of the decision aid on patient participation in decision-making and resource use. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a protocol for a parallel, 2-arm randomized trial to compare an intervention group receiving CHEST PAIN CHOICE to a control group receiving usual ED care. Adults presenting to the Saint Mary's Hospital ED in Rochester, MN USA with a primary complaint of chest pain who are being considered for admission for prolonged ED observation in a specialized unit and urgent cardiac stress testing will be eligible for enrollment. We will measure the effect of CHEST PAIN CHOICE on six outcomes: (1) patient knowledge regarding their short-term risk for ACS and the risks of radiation exposure; (2) quality of the decision making process; (3) patient and clinician acceptability and satisfaction with the decision aid; (4) the proportion of patients who decided to undergo observation unit admission and urgent cardiac stress testing; (5) economic costs and healthcare utilization; and (6) the rate of delayed or missed ACS. To capture these outcomes, we will administer patient and clinician surveys after each visit, obtain video recordings of the clinical encounters, and conduct 30-day phone follow-up. DISCUSSION: This pilot randomized trial will develop and evaluate a decision aid for use in ED chest pain patients at low risk for ACS and provide a preliminary estimate of its effect on patient participation in decision-making and resource use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01077037.

Derivation and validation of an index to predict early death or unplanned readmission after discharge from hospital to the community.

BACKGROUND: Readmissions to hospital are common, costly and often preventable. An easy-to-use index to quantify the risk of readmission or death after discharge from hospital would help clinicians identify patients who might benefit from more intensive post-discharge care. We sought to derive and validate an index to predict the risk of death or unplanned readmission within 30 days after discharge from hospital to the community. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, 48 patient-level and admission-level variables were collected for 4812 medical and surgical patients who were discharged to the community from 11 hospitals in Ontario. We used a split-sample design to derive and validate an index to predict the risk of death or nonelective readmission within 30 days after discharge. This index was externally validated using administrative data in a random selection of 1,000,000 Ontarians discharged from hospital between 2004 and 2008. RESULTS: Of the 4812 participating patients, 385 (8.0%) died or were readmitted on an unplanned basis within 30 days after discharge. Variables independently associated with this outcome (from which we derived the mnemonic "LACE") included length of stay ("L"); acuity of the admission ("A"); comorbidity of the patient (measured with the Charlson comorbidity index score) ("C"); and emergency department use (measured as the number of visits in the six months before admission) ("E"). Scores using the LACE index ranged from 0 (2.0% expected risk of death or urgent readmission within 30 days) to 19 (43.7% expected risk). The LACE index was discriminative (C statistic 0.684) and very accurate (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic 14.1, p=0.59) at predicting outcome risk. INTERPRETATION: The LACE index can be used to quantify risk of death or unplanned readmission within 30 days after discharge from hospital. This index can be used with both primary and administrative data. Further research is required to determine whether such quantification changes patient care or outcomes.

Derivation of a clinical decision rule for chest radiography in emergency department patients with chest pain and possible acute coronary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: We derived a clinical decision rule to determine which emergency department (ED) patients with chest pain and possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS) require chest radiography. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients over 24 years of age with a primary complaint of chest pain and possible ACS over a 6 month period. Emergency physicians completed standardized clinical assessments and ordered chest radiographs as appropriate. Two blinded investigators independently classified chest radiographs as "normal," "abnormal not requiring intervention" and "abnormal requiring intervention," based on review of the radiology report and the medical record. The primary outcome was abnormality of chest radiographs requiring acute intervention. Analyses included interrater reliability assessment (with kappa statistics), univariate analyses and recursive partitioning. RESULTS: We enrolled 529 patients during the study period between Jul. 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2007. Patients had a mean age of 59.9 years, 60.3% were male, 4.0% had a history of congestive heart failure and 21.9% had a history of acute myocardial infarction. Only 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1%-3.8%) of patients had radiographic abnormality of the chest requiring acute intervention. The kappa statistic for chest radiograph classification was 0.81 (95% CI 0.66-0.95). We derived the following rule: patients can forgo chest radiography if they have no history of congestive heart failure, no history of smoking and no abnormalities on lung auscultation. The rule was 100% sensitive (95% CI 32.0%-40.4%) and 36.1% specific (95% CI 32.0%-40.4%). CONCLUSION: This rule has potential to reduce health care costs and enhance ED patient flow. It requires validation in an independent patient population before introduction into clinical practice.

A critical assessment of the out-of-hospital trauma triage guidelines for physiologic abnormality.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACSCOT) "step 1" field physiologic criteria could be further restricted without substantially sacrificing sensitivity. We assessed whether more restrictive physiologic criteria would improve the specificity of this triage step without missing high-risk patients. METHODS: We analyzed an out-of-hospital, consecutive patient, prospective cohort of injured adults >or=15 years collected from December 1, 2005, to February 28, 2007, by 237 emergency medical service agencies transporting to 207 acute care hospitals in 11 sites across the United States and Canada. Patients were included based on ACSCOT field decision scheme physiologic criteria systolic blood pressure 29 breaths/min, Glasgow Coma Scale score 2 days. RESULTS: Of 7,127 injured persons, 6,259 had complete outcome information and were included in the analysis. There were 3,631 (58.0%) persons with death or LOS >2 days. Using only physiologic measures, the derived rule included advanced airway intervention, shock index >1.4, Glasgow Coma Scale <11, and pulse oximetry <93%. Rule validation demonstrated sensitivity 72% (95% confidence interval: 70%-74%) and specificity 69% (95% confidence interval: 67%-72%). Inclusion of demographic and mechanism variables did not significantly improve performance measures. CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to omit or further restrict any ACSCOT step 1 physiologic measures in a decision rule practical for field use without missing high-risk trauma patients.

Structure and function of emergency care research networks: strengths, weaknesses, and challenges.

The ability of emergency care research (ECR) to produce meaningful improvements in the outcomes of acutely ill or injured patients depends on the optimal configuration, infrastructure, organization, and support of emergency care research networks (ECRNs). Through the experiences of existing ECRNs, we can learn how to best accomplish this. A meeting was organized in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2008, to discuss the present state and future directions of clinical research networks as they relate to emergency care. Prior to the conference, at the time of online registration, participants responded to a series of preconference questions addressing the relevant issues that would form the basis of the breakout session discussions. During the conference, representatives from a number of existing ECRNs participated in discussions with the attendees and provided a description of their respective networks, infrastructure, and challenges. Breakout sessions provided the opportunity to further discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these networks and patterns of success with respect to their formation, management, funding, best practices, and pitfalls. Discussions centered on identifying characteristics that promote or inhibit successful networks and their interactivity, productivity, and expansion. Here the authors describe the current state of ECRNs and identify the strengths, weaknesses, and potential pitfalls of research networks. The most commonly cited strengths of population- or disease-based research networks identified in the preconference survey were access to larger numbers of patients; involvement of physician experts in the field, contributing to high-level study content; and the collaboration among investigators. The most commonly cited weaknesses were studies with too narrow a focus and restrictive inclusion criteria, a vast organizational structure with a risk of either too much or too little central organization or control, and heterogeneity of institutional policies and procedures among sites. Through the survey and structured discussion process involving multiple stakeholders, the authors have identified strengths and weaknesses that are consistent across a number of existing ECRNs. By leveraging the strengths and addressing the weaknesses, strategies can be adopted to enhance the scientific value and productivity of these networks and give direction to future ECRNs.

Comparison of the Cerebral Performance Category score and the Health Utilities Index for survivors of cardiac arrest.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The Cerebral Performance Category score is an easy to use but unvalidated measure of functional outcome after cardiac arrest. We evaluate the comparability of results from the Cerebral Performance Category scale versus those of the validated but more complex Health Utilities Index scale for health-related quality of life. METHODS: This prospective substudy of the Ontario Prehospital Advanced Life Support (OPALS) Study included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients treated in 20 cities. This prospective cohort study included all survivors of out-of-hospital adult cardiac arrest enrolled in phase II (rapid basic life support with defibrillation) and phase III (advanced life support) of the OPALS Study, as well as the intervening run-in phase. Survivors were interviewed at 12 months for Cerebral Performance Category Score and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (Health Utilities Index). RESULTS: Of 8,196 eligible out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients between 1995 and 2002, 418 (5.1%) survived to discharge, and 305 (3.7%) completed the Health Utilities Index interview and had Cerebral Performance Category scored at 12 months. The 305 patients had the following data: mean age 63.9 years; male 78.0%; paramedic-witnessed arrest 25.6%; bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation 32.1%; initial rhythm ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia 86.9%, Cerebral Performance Category 1 267, Cerebral Performance Category 2 26, Cerebral Performance Category 3 12. Overall, the median scores (interquartile range) were Cerebral Performance Category 1 (1 to 1) and Health Utilities Index 0.84 (0.61 to 0.97). The Cerebral Performance Category score ruled out good quality of life (Health Utilities Index >0.80), with a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 98% to 100%) and specificity 27.1% (95% CI 20% to 35%); thus, when the Cerebral Performance Category score was 2 or 3, it was unlikely that the Health Utilities Index score would be good. The Cerebral Performance Category score had sensitivity 55.6% (95% CI 42% to 67%) and specificity 96.8% (95% CI 94% to 98%) for predicting poor quality of life (Health Utilities Index >0.40); ie, when Cerebral Performance Category was 1, it was highly unlikely that the Health Utilities Index score would be poor. The weighted kappa was 0.39 and the interclass correlation was 0.51. CONCLUSION: This represents the largest study yet conducted of the performance of the Cerebral Performance Category score in 1-year survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Overall, the Cerebral Performance Category score classified patients well for their quality of life, ruling out a good Health Utilities Index score with high sensitivity and ruling in poor Health Utilities Index score with high specificity. The Cerebral Performance Category is an important tool in that it indicates broad functional outcome categories that are useful for a number of key clinical and research applications but should not be considered a substitute for the Health Utilities Index.

International survey of emergency physicians' priorities for clinical decision rules.

OBJECTIVES: One of the first stages in the development of new clinical decision rules (CDRs) is determination of need. This study examined the clinical priorities of emergency physicians (EPs) working in Australasia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States for the development of future CDRs. METHODS: The authors administered an e-mail and postal survey to members of the national emergency medicine (EM) associations in Australasia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Results were analyzed via frequency distributions. RESULTS: The total response rate was 54.8% (1,150/2,100). The respondents were primarily male (74%), with a mean age of 42.5 years (SD +/- 8), and a mean of 12 years of experience (SD +/- 7). The top 10 clinical priorities (% selected) were: 1) investigation of febrile child < 36 months (62%); 2) identification of central or serious vertigo (42%); 3) lumbar puncture or admission of febrile child < 3 months (41%); 4) imaging for suspected transient ischemic attack (39%); 5) admission for anterior chest pain (37%); 6) computed tomography (CT) angiography for pulmonary embolus (30%); 7) admission for suicide risk (29%); 8) ultrasound for pain or bleeding in the first trimester of pregnancy (28%); 9) nonspecific weakness in elders (26%); and 10) CT for abdominal pain (25%). Between study countries, there was consistency in identification of clinical problems, but variation in prioritization. CONCLUSIONS: This international survey identified the sampled EPs' priorities for the future development of CDRs. The top priority overall was investigation of the febrile child < 36 months. These results will be valuable to researchers for future development of CDRs in EM that are relevant internationally.

A matched-pair cluster design study protocol to evaluate implementation of the Canadian C-spine rule in hospital emergency departments: Phase III.

BACKGROUND: Physicians in Canadian emergency departments (EDs) annually treat 185,000 alert and stable trauma victims who are at risk for cervical spine (C-spine) injury. However, only 0.9% of these patients have suffered a cervical spine fracture. Current use of radiography is not efficient. The Canadian C-Spine Rule is designed to allow physicians to be more selective and accurate in ordering C-spine radiography, and to rapidly clear the C-spine without the need for radiography in many patients. The goal of this phase III study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an active strategy to implement the Canadian C-Spine Rule into physician practice. Specific objectives are to: 1) determine clinical impact, 2) determine sustainability, 3) evaluate performance, and 4) conduct an economic evaluation. METHODS: We propose a matched-pair cluster design study that compares outcomes during three consecutive 12-months "before," "after," and "decay" periods at six pairs of "intervention" and "control" sites. These 12 hospital ED sites will be stratified as "teaching" or "community" hospitals, matched according to baseline C-spine radiography ordering rates, and then allocated within each pair to either intervention or control groups. During the "after" period at the intervention sites, simple and inexpensive strategies will be employed to actively implement the Canadian C-Spine Rule. The following outcomes will be assessed: 1) measures of clinical impact, 2) performance of the Canadian C-Spine Rule, and 3) economic measures. During the 12-month "decay" period, implementation strategies will continue, allowing us to evaluate the sustainability of the effect. We estimate a sample size of 4,800 patients in each period in order to have adequate power to evaluate the main outcomes. DISCUSSION: Phase I successfully derived the Canadian C-Spine Rule and phase II confirmed the accuracy and safety of the rule, hence, the potential for physicians to improve care. What remains unknown is the actual change in clinical behaviors that can be affected by implementation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule, and whether implementation can be achieved with simple and inexpensive measures. We believe that the Canadian C-Spine Rule has the potential to significantly reduce health care costs and improve the efficiency of patient flow in busy Canadian EDs.

Out-of-hospital pediatric cardiac arrest: an epidemiologic review and assessment of current knowledge.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We systematically summarize pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest epidemiology and assess knowledge of effects of specific out-of-hospital interventions. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive review of published articles from 1966 to 2004, available through MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EmBase, and the Cochrane Registry, describing outcomes of children younger than 18 years with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Patient characteristics, process of care, and outcomes were compared using pediatric Utstein outcome report guidelines. Effects of out-of-hospital care processes on survival outcomes were summarized. RESULTS: Forty-one studies met inclusion criteria; 8 complied with Utstein reporting guidelines. Included in the review were 5,363 patients: 12.1% survived to hospital discharge, and 4% survived neurologically intact. Trauma patients (n=2,299) had greater overall survival (21.9%, 6.8% intact); a separate examination of studies with more rigorous cardiac arrest definition showed poorer survival (1.1% overall, 0.3% neurologically intact). Submersion injury-associated arrests (n=442) had greater overall survival (22.7%, 6% intact). Pooled data analysis of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and witnessed arrest status showed increased likelihood of survival (relative risk 1.99, 95% confidence interval 1.54 to 2.57) for witnessed arrests. The effect of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation is difficult to determine because of study heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Outcomes from out-of-hospital pediatric cardiac arrest are generally poor. Variability may exist in survival by patient subgroups, but differences are hard to accurately characterize. Conformity with Utstein guidelines for reporting and research design is incomplete. Witnessed arrest status remains associated with improved survival. The need for prospective controlled trials remains a high priority.