Patient perceptions of behavioral flags in the emergency department: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: To combat increasing levels of violence in the emergency department (ED), hospitals have implemented several safety measures, including behavioral flags. These electronic health record (EHR)-based notifications alert future clinicians of past incidents of potentially threatening patient behavior, but observed racial disparities in their placement may unintentionally introduce bias in patient care. Little is known about how patients perceive these flags and the disparities that have been found in their placement. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate patient perceptions and perceived benefits and harms associated with the use of behavioral flags. METHODS: Twenty-five semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of patients in the ED of a large, urban, academic medical center who did not have a behavioral flag in their EHR. Interviews lasted 10-20 min and were recorded then transcribed. Thematic analysis of deidentified transcripts took place in NVivo 20 software (QSR International) using a general inductive approach. RESULTS: Participant perceptions of behavioral flags varied, with both positive and negative opinions being shared. Five key themes, each with subthemes, were identified: (1) benefits of behavioral flags, (2) concerns and potential harms of flags, (3) transparency with patients, (4) equity, and (5) ideas for improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Patient perspectives on the use of behavioral flags in the ED vary. While many saw flags as a helpful tool to mitigate violence, concerns around negative impacts on care, transparency, and equity were also shared. Insights from this stakeholder perspective may allow for health systems to make flags more effective without compromising equity or patient ideals.

Perspectives of Black Patients on Racism Within Emergency Care.

Importance: Numerous Black individuals experience racism persistently throughout their lives, with repercussions extending into health care settings. The perspectives of Black individuals regarding emergency department (ED) care, racism, and patient-centered approaches for dismantling structural racism remain less explored. Objective: To qualitatively explore the perspectives and experiences of Black patients related to race, racism, and health care following a recent ED visit. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, the audio from semistructured interviews of Black patients discharged from an academic urban ED between August 2021 to April 2022 were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes encompassed the main themes from the analysis of the interviews with Black patients regarding their perspectives on race, racism, and clinical care. Results: A total of 25 Black patients (20 [80%] female; mean [SD] age, 44.6 [12.9] years) discharged from the ED were interviewed. Three broad domains were identified: (1) racism in health care; (2) ED clinical care; and (3) recommendations for improvement. Within these domains, the first 2 were grouped into specific themes. Within the first domain, racism in health care, 7 themes were identified using thematic analysis: (1) a history of medical racism; (2) dismissiveness; (3) patient expectations on encountering racism; (4) medical mistrust; (5) health literacy; (6) postencounter outcomes, and (7) discrimination beyond but associated with race. Within the second theme, ED clinical care, 5 themes were identified using the same thematic analysis method: (1) discharge plan; (2) patient experience; (3) waiting room perceptions; (4) medication treatment; and (5) pain management. The third domain, recommendations for improvement, incorporated patient-generated suggestions for enhancing the Black patient experience. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, the fabric of clinical care delivery in the ED was intricately woven with Black patients' experiences of racism. Patients expressed a pervasive sense of mistrust, skepticism, and dismissiveness at the system level. Instances of racism were consistently highlighted by patients from their entry to the ED to discharge. These perspectives illuminate the pervasive nature of racism in clinical care, providing valuable insights for exploring patient-centered approaches to foster antiracist cultures in the ED and throughout the broader medical landscape.

Are There Differences in Postoperative Opioid Prescribing Across Racial and Ethnic Groups? Assessment of an Academic Health System.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated racial disparities in opioid prescribing in emergency departments and after surgical procedures. Orthopaedic surgeons account for a large proportion of dispensed opioid prescriptions, yet there are few data investigating whether racial or ethnic disparities exist in opioid dispensing after orthopaedic procedures. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Are Black, Hispanic or Latino, or Asian or Pacific Islander (PI) patients less likely than non-Hispanic White patients to receive an opioid prescription after an orthopaedic procedure in an academic United States health system? (2) Of the patients who do receive a postoperative opioid prescription, do Black, Hispanic or Latino, or Asian or PI patients receive a lower analgesic dose than non-Hispanic White patients when analyzed by type of procedure performed? METHODS: Between January 2017 and March 2021, 60,782 patients underwent an orthopaedic surgical procedure at one of the six Penn Medicine healthcare system hospitals. Of these patients, we considered patients who had not been prescribed an opioid within 1 year eligible for the study, resulting in 61% (36,854) of patients. A total of 40% (24,106) of patients were excluded because they did not undergo one of the top eight most-common orthopaedic procedures studied or their procedure was not performed by a Penn Medicine faculty member. Missing data consisted of 382 patients who had no race or ethnicity listed in their record or declined to provide a race or ethnicity; these patients were excluded. This left 12,366 patients for analysis. Sixty-five percent (8076) of patients identified as non-Hispanic White, 27% (3289) identified as Black, 3% (372) identified as Hispanic or Latino, 3% (318) identified as Asian or PI, and 3% (311) identified as another race ("other"). Prescription dosages were converted to total morphine milligram equivalents for analysis. Statistical differences in receipt of a postoperative opioid prescription were assessed with multivariate logistic regression models within procedure, adjusted for age, gender, and type of healthcare insurance. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess for differences in the total morphine milligram equivalent dosage of the prescription, stratified by procedure. RESULTS: Almost all patients (95% [11,770 of 12,366]) received an opioid prescription. After risk adjustment, we found no differences in the odds of Black (odds ratio 0.94 [95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.15]; p = 0.68), Hispanic or Latino (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.47 to 1.20]; p = 0.18), Asian or PI (OR 1.00 [95% CI 0.58 to 1.74]; p = 0.96), or other-race patients (OR 1.33 [95% CI 0.72 to 2.47]; p = 0.26) receiving a postoperative opioid prescription compared with non-Hispanic White patients. There were no race or ethnicity differences in the median morphine milligram equivalent dose of postoperative opioid analgesics prescribed (p > 0.1 for all eight procedures) based on procedure. CONCLUSION: In this academic health system, we did not find any differences in opioid prescribing after common orthopaedic procedures by patient race or ethnicity. A potential explanation is the use of surgical pathways in our orthopaedic department. Formal standardized opioid prescribing guidelines may reduce variability in opioid prescribing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

A Randomized Trial of Incentivization to Maximize Retention for Real-Time Symptom and Activity Monitoring Using Ecological Momentary Assessment in Pediatric Concussion.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine the incentivization strategy that maximizes patient adherence to report symptoms and activity via ecological momentary assessment (EMA) after pediatric concussion, and assess the feasibility of tracking concussed youth using EMA from the emergency department (ED) setting. METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trial of participants ages 13 to 18 years with concussion presenting to an urban, academic pediatric ED within 5 days of injury. Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 incentive arms: 2 dynamic (loss-based and streak) and 2 control flat-rate (monetary and electronic device). Participants reported symptoms 3 times per day and cognitive activity once each evening for 3 weeks. Physical activity (step count) and sleep were monitored using a Fitbit (kept by participants in the device flat-rate arm). The primary outcome was proportion of prompts to which participants responded. Secondary outcomes included differential response rates by demographics, and comparison of outcome determination between EMA and subsequent clinical visits. RESULTS: Thirty participants were enrolled, with a median age of 15.5 years and 60% female. Median cumulative proportion of prompts responded to was 68.3% (interquartile range, 47.6%-82.5%) in the dynamic arms versus 54.0% (interquartile range. 20.6%-68.3%) in the flat-rate arms, P = 0.065. There were nonsignificant differences in median response by sex (65.9% for female vs 40.0% for male, P = 0.072), race/ethnicity (61.9% for non-Hispanic White vs 43.7% for non-Hispanic Black participants, P = 0.097), and insurance (61.9% for private insurance vs 47.6% for public insurance, P = 0.305). Recovery at 3 weeks was discernible for all but 2 participants (93.3%) using EMA data, compared with only 9 participants (30.0%) ( P < 0.001) from clinical visits. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic incentivization showed higher rates of response to tridaily symptom prompts compared with flat-rate incentivization. These data show tracking concussed youth using EMA from the ED is feasible using a dynamic incentivization strategy, with improved ability to discern outcomes compared with prospective monitoring using follow-up clinical visits.

Prevalence of Behavioral Flags in the Electronic Health Record Among Black and White Patients Visiting the Emergency Department.

Importance: Behavioral flags in the electronic health record (EHR) are designed to alert clinicians of potentially unsafe or aggressive patients. These flags may introduce bias, and understanding how they are used is important to ensure equitable care. Objective: To investigate the incidence of behavioral flags and assess whether there were differences between Black and White patients and whether the flags were associated with differences in emergency department (ED) clinical care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of EHR data of adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 3 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, EDs within a single health system between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019. Secondary analyses excluded patients with sickle cell disease and high ED care utilization. Data were analyzed from February 1 to April 4, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of interest was the presence of an EHR behavioral flag. Secondary measures included variation of flags across sex, race, age, insurance status, triage status, ED clinical care metrics (eg, laboratory, medication, and radiology orders), ED disposition (discharge, admission, or observation), and length of key intervals during ED care. Results: Participating EDs had 195 601 eligible patients (110 890 [56.7%] female patients; 113 638 Black patients [58.1%]; 81 963 White patients [41.9%]; median [IQR] age, 42 [28-60] years), with 426 858 ED visits. Among these, 683 patients (0.3%) had a behavioral flag notification in the EHR (3.5 flags per 1000 patients), and it was present for 6851 ED visits (16 flagged visits per 1000 visits). Patient differences between those with a flag and those without included male sex (56.1% vs 43.3%), Black race (71.2% vs 56.7%), and insurance status, particularly Medicaid insurance (74.5% vs 36.3%). Flag use varied across sites. Black patients received flags at a rate of 4.0 per 1000 patients, and White patients received flags at a rate of 2.4 per 1000 patients (P < .001). Among patients with a flag, Black patients, compared with White patients, had longer waiting times to be placed in a room (median [IQR] time, 28.0 [10.5-89.4] minutes vs 18.2 [7.2-75.1] minutes; P < .001), longer waiting times to see a clinician (median [IQR] time, 42.1 [18.8-105.5] minutes vs 33.3 [15.3-84.5] minutes; P < .001), and shorter lengths of stay (median [IQR] time, 274 [135-471] minutes vs 305 [154-491] minutes; P = .01). Black patients with a flag underwent fewer laboratory (eg, 2449 Black patients with 0 orders [43.4%] vs 441 White patients with 0 orders [36.7%]; P < .001) and imaging (eg, 3541 Black patients with no imaging [62.7%] vs 675 White patients with no imaging [56.2%]; P < .001) tests compared with White patients with a flag. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found significant differences in ED clinical care metrics, including that flagged patients had longer wait times and were less likely to undergo laboratory testing and imaging, which was amplified in Black patients.

Assessing experiences of racism among Black and White patients in the emergency department.

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the differences in patient-reported experiences related to emergency department (ED) care using a post-discharge text messaging survey. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of patients discharged from the ED using an automated text messaging platform to assess patient experience and impact of race on ED care. The study was conducted for 7 weeks between August 6 and September 24, 2021. Participants included adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from 2 urban, academic EDs with an active mobile phone number in the electronic health record. The primary outcome of interest was patient-reported impact of race on overall rating of ED care. Secondary outcomes included overall satisfaction with care and perceived impact of race on components of care, including respect, communication, and quality of care. A 6-point Likert scale was used, and chi-square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to analyze responses. Results: A total of 590 (14%) discharged patients consented, and 462 patients completed the entire survey; the mean age was 43 years (SD 17.3); 67% were women, and 60.0% were Black. Black patients reported a higher overall rating of ED care (median 5 [3, 5]; P = 0.013). Proportionately, when compared with White patients, more Black patients reported that race negatively impacted the rating of care (10.8% vs 1.4%; P = 0.002). More than a quarter of Black patients (27.4%) reported race highly impacting being treated with respect (P = 0.024), and 22.4% reported a high impact on quality of service (P = 0.003) when compared with White patients. Conclusion: Health systems lack methods that specifically identify patient experiences of racism. We demonstrate the feasibility of using text messaging to collect patient-reported experiences of racism. For a significant number of Black patients, race negatively impacted their care, including communication, quality, and respect.

Assessment of Patient-Reported Naloxone Acquisition and Carrying With an Automated Text Messaging System After Emergency Department Discharge in Philadelphia.

Importance: A central tenet of harm reduction and prevention of opioid overdose deaths is the distribution and use of naloxone. Patient-centered methods that investigate naloxone acquisition and carrying can guide opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution efforts. Objective: To assess patients' self-reported naloxone acquisition and carrying after an emergency department (ED) encounter using automated text messaging. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study investigated self-reported patient behaviors involving naloxone after ED discharge in a large, urban academic health system in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Adult patients who were prescribed or dispensed naloxone and who had a mobile phone number listed in the electronic health record provided informed consent after ED discharge, and data were collected prospectively using text messaging from October 10, 2020, to March 19, 2021. Patients who did not respond to the survey or who opted out were excluded. Exposure: Automated text message-based survey after ED discharge for patients who were prescribed or dispensed naloxone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patient-reported naloxone acquisition, carrying, and use. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographic characteristics. Results: Of 205 eligible patients, 41 (20.0%) completed the survey; of those patients, the mean (SD) age was 39.5 (13.7) years, and 21 (51.2%) were women. Fifteen (36.6%) had a personal history of being given naloxone after an overdose. As indicated by the ED record, 27 participants (65.9%) had naloxone dispensed in the ED, and 36 (87.8%) self-reported acquiring naloxone during or after their ED visit. Twenty-four participants (58.5%) were not carrying naloxone in the week before their ED visit. Twenty participants (48.8%) were carrying naloxone after the ED visit, and 27 (65.9%) reported planning to continue carrying naloxone in the future. Of the 24 individuals (58.5%) not carrying naloxone before their ED encounter, 13 (54.2%) reported planning to continue carrying naloxone in the future. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of adult patients dispensed or prescribed naloxone from the ED, most reported acquiring naloxone on or after discharge. The ED remains a key point of access to naloxone for individuals at high risk of opioid use and overdose, and text messaging could be a method to engage and motivate patient-reported behaviors in enhancing naloxone acquisition and carrying.

Effect of Gamification With and Without Financial Incentives to Increase Physical Activity Among Veterans Classified as Having Obesity or Overweight: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Gamification is increasingly being used for health promotion but has not been well tested with financial incentives or among veterans. Objective: To test the effectiveness of gamification with social support, with and without a loss-framed financial incentive, to increase physical activity among veterans classified as having overweight and obesity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 3-group randomized clinical trial had a 12-week intervention period and an 8-week follow-up period. Participants included veterans with a body mass index greater than or equal to 25 who were receiving care from a single site in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Participants underwent a remotely monitored intervention from March 19, 2019, to August 9, 2020. Data analyses were conducted between October 1, 2020, and November 14, 2020. Interventions: All participants received a wearable device to track step counts and selected a step goal. The control group received feedback from their devices only. Participants in the 2 gamification groups were entered into a 12-week game with points and levels designed using behavioral economic principles and selected a support partner to receive weekly updates. Participants in the loss-framed financial incentive group had $120 allocated to a virtual account and lost $10 if weekly goals were not achieved. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in mean daily steps from baseline during the intervention. Secondary outcomes include proportion of days goals were achieved and changes during follow-up. Results: A total of 180 participants were randomized, 60 to the gamification with social support group, 60 to the gamification with social support and loss-framed financial incentives group, and 60 to the control group. The participants had a mean (SD) age of 56.5 (12.9) years and a mean (SD) body mass index of 33.0 (5.6); 71 participants (39.4%) were women, 90 (50.0%) were White, and 67 (37.2%) were Black. During the intervention period, compared with control group participants, participants in the gamification with financial incentives group had a significant increase in mean daily steps from baseline (adjusted difference, 1224 steps; 95% CI, 451 to 1996 steps; P = .005), but participants in the gamification without financial incentives group did not (adjusted difference, 433 steps; 95% CI, -337 to 1203 steps; P = .81). The increase for the gamification with financial incentives group was not sustained during the follow-up period, and the step count was not significantly different than that of the control group (adjusted difference, 564 steps; 95% CI, -261 to 1389 steps; P = .37). Compared with the control group, participants in the intervention groups had a significantly higher adjusted proportion of days meeting their step goal during the main intervention and follow-up period (gamification with social support group, adjusted difference from control, 0.21 participant-day; 95% CI, 0.18-0.24 participant-day; P < .001; gamification with social support and loss-framed financial incentive group, adjusted difference from control, 0.34 participant-day; 95% CI, 0.31-0.37 participant-day; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among veterans classified as having overweight and obesity, gamification with social support combined with loss-framed financial incentives was associated with a modest increase in physical activity during the intervention period, but the increase was not sustained during follow-up. Gamification without incentives did not significantly change physical activity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03563027.

Estimating the incidence of suspected epidural hematoma and the hidden imaging cost of epidural catheterization: a retrospective review of 43,200 cases.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hematoma associated with epidural catheterization is rare, but the diagnosis might be suspected relatively frequently. We sought to estimate the incidence of suspected epidural hematoma after epidural catheterization and to determine the associated cost of excluding or diagnosing an epidural hematoma through radiologic imaging. METHODS: We conducted an electronic retrospective chart review of 43,200 patient charts using 4 distinct search strategies and cost analysis, all from a single academic institution from 2001 through 2009. The charts were reviewed for use of radiologic imaging studies to identify patients with suspected and confirmed epidural hematomas. Costs for imaging to exclude or confirm the diagnosis were related to the entire cohort. RESULTS: In our analysis, during a 9-year period that included 43,200 epidural catheterizations, 102 patients (1/430) underwent further imaging studies to exclude or confirm the presence of an epidural hematoma-revealing 6 confirmed cases and an overall incidence (per 10,000 epidural blocks) of epidural hematoma of 1.38 (95% confidence interval, 0-0.002). Among our patients, 207 imaging studies, primarily lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging, were performed. Integrating Medicare cost expenditure data, the estimated additional cost during a 9-year period for imaging and hospital charges related to identifying epidural hematomas nets to approximately $232,000 or an additional $5.37 per epidural. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 430 patients undergoing epidural catheterization will be suspected to have an epidural hematoma. The cost of excluding the diagnosis, when suspected, is relatively low when allocated across all patients undergoing epidural catheterization.