Geriatric Emergency Medication Safety Recommendations (GEMS-Rx): Modified Delphi Development of a High-Risk Prescription List for Older Emergency Department Patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Half of emergency department (ED) patients aged 65 years and older are discharged with new prescriptions. Potentially inappropriate prescriptions contribute to adverse drug events. Our objective was to develop an evidence- and consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions to avoid among older ED patients. METHODS: We performed a modified, 3-round Delphi process that included 10 ED physician experts in geriatrics or quality measurement and 1 pharmacist. Consensus members reviewed all 35 medication categories from the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria and ranked each on a 5-point Likert scale (5=highest) for overall priority for avoidance (Round 1), risk of short-term adverse events and avoidability (Round 2), and reasonable medical indications for high-risk medication use (Round 3). RESULTS: For each round, questionnaire response rates were 91%, 82%, and 64%, respectively. After Round 1, benzodiazepines (mean, 4.60 [SD, 0.70]), skeletal muscle relaxants (4.60 [0.70]), barbiturates (4.30 [1.06]), first-generation antipsychotics (4.20 [0.63]) and first-generation antihistamines (3.70 [1.49]) were prioritized for avoidance. In Rounds 2 and 3, hypnotic "Z" drugs (4.29 [1.11]), metoclopramide (3.89 [0.93]), and sulfonylureas (4.14 [1.07]) were prioritized for avoidability, despite lower concern for short-term adverse events. All 8 medication classes were included in the final list. Reasonable indications for prescribing high-risk medications included seizure disorders, benzodiazepine/ethanol withdrawal, end of life, severe generalized anxiety, allergic reactions, gastroparesis, and prescription refill. CONCLUSION: We present the first expert consensus-based list of high-risk prescriptions for older ED patients (GEMS-Rx) to improve safety among older ED patients.

The Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) and emergency department observation and admission rates: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) Observation Units (OU) can provide safe, effective care for low risk patients with intracranial hemorrhages. We compared current ED OU use for patients with subdural hematomas (SDH) to the validated Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) to evaluate the potential impact of implementing this risk stratification tool. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of patients ≥18 years old with SDH of any cause from 2014 to 2020 to evaluate for potential missed OU cases. Missed OU cases were defined as patients with an initial Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) of 15 with hospital length of stays (LOS) <2 days, who did not meet the composite outcome and were not cared for in the OU or discharged from the ED. Composite outcome included in-hospital death or transition to hospice care, neurosurgical intervention, GCS decline, and worsening SDH size. Secondary outcomes were whether application of BIG would increase ED OU use or reduce CT use. RESULTS: 264 patients met inclusion criteria over 5.3 year study timeframe. Mean age was 61 years (range 19-93) and 61.4% were male. SDH were traumatic in 76.9% and 60.2% of the cohort had additional injuries. The admission rate was 81.4% (n = 215). Fourteen (6.5%) missed OU cases were identified (2.6/year). Retrospective application of BIG resulted in 82.6% (n = 217) at BIG 3, 10.2% (n = 27) at BIG 2 and 7.6% (n = 20) at BIG 1. Application of BIG would not have decreased admission rates (82.6% BIG 3) and BIG 1 and 2 admissions were often for medical co-morbidities. The composite outcome was met in 50% of BIG 3, 22% of BIG 2, and no BIG 1 patients. CONCLUSION: In a level 1 trauma center with an established observation unit, current clinical care processes missed very few patients who could be discharged or placed in ED OU for SDH. Hospital admissions in BIG 1/2 were driven by co-morbidities and/or injuries, limiting applicability of BIG to this population.

Involuntary sedation of patients in the emergency department for mental health: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Involuntary sedation of agitated mental health patients in the Emergency Department (ED) is standard practice to obtain accurate medical assessments and maintain safety. However, the rate of this practice and what factors are associated with the use of involuntary sedation is unknown. The purpose of this study was to obtain baseline data on involuntary sedation in our EDs. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with ED visits for mental health care in 2020-2021. Patients >12 years old who received both a psychiatry consultation and involuntary sedation were included. Data variables included demographics, medical and mental health diagnoses, sedatives given, substance use, ED length of stay, and disposition. The primary outcome was repeated involuntary sedation. RESULTS: Involuntary sedation was used in 18.8% of the mental health patients screened for study inclusion. 334 patients were included in the study cohort and 31.6% (n = 106) required repeated involuntary sedation. Their average age was 35.5 ± 13.5 years with 58.4% men, 40.1% women, and 1.2% transgender persons. Most (90.0%, n = 299) had prior mental health diagnoses with the most common being substance use disorder (38.9%, n = 130), bipolar disorder (34.1%, n = 114), depressive disorder (29.0%, n = 97), and schizophrenia (24.3%, n = 81). Two-thirds (65.9%, n = 220) had current substance use and 41.9% (n = 142) reported current use with a chemical associated with aggression. Hospital security was called for 73.1% (n = 244). Current cocaine, methamphetamines, or alcohol use was associated with decreased odds of repeated sedation (0.52 OR, 95% CI 0.32-0.85). Prior mental health diagnosis and non-white race were associated with increased odds of repeated sedation. In the multivariable regression, the effect of race was more significant. CONCLUSIONS: Involuntary sedation was used in 18.8% of ED patients for mental health care and almost a third were repeatedly sedated, with race being a potential risk factor for repeated sedation. ED care could benefit from evidence-based interventions to reduce the need for involuntary sedation.

Impact of a trauma recovery center on emergency department utilization for victims of violence.

BACKGROUND: Victims of violence are at high risk for unmet mental and physical health care needs which can translate into increased Emergency Department (ED) visits. We investigated the effectiveness of participation in a psychosocial, case management-based trauma recovery program on ED utilization. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of ED utilization before and after referral to a Trauma Recovery Center (TRC). Charts of TRC participants from 6/2017-5/2019 who consented in clinic to their medical records being used for research were reviewed. The primary outcome was the change in ED utilization 6 months pre- and post-referral to a TRC. The secondary outcomes were factors associated with ED visits after TRC referral, including victimization or mental health issues. RESULTS: The study group contained 143 patients, of which 82% identified as female and 62% identified as white. Many (39%, n = 56) were part of one or more vulnerable populations and type of victimization varied extensively. Intervention uptake was high as almost all (92%, n = 132) had at least one TRC encounter [median of 6 encounters (IQR 2-13)] and an average of 2.7 services used. Most participants (67.1%, n = 96) had no change in ED use. Forty (28.0%) had at least 1 ED visit 6 months before, 38 (26.8%) had at least 1 ED visit 6 months afterwards, and 81 (56.6%) had no ED visits during either timeframe. ED visits per person in the 6 months prior to referral were not different from visits per person in the 6 months after referral (0.52 vs 0.49, p = 0.76, paired t-test). Negative binomial regression indicated number of ED visits before referral (IRR 1.5, 95% confidence interval [1.27-1.79]) and pre-existing mental health conditions (IRR 2.2, 95% confidence interval [0.98-5.02]) were most associated with an increase in the incidence rate ratio of ED visits in the 6 months after referral. CONCLUSION: Despite high engagement, a multidisciplinary Trauma Recovery Center did not reduce ED utilization. ED utilization prior to TRC was the most predictive factor of ED utilization afterwards.

Reach and Adoption of a Geriatric Emergency Department Accreditation Program in the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to describe the reach and adoption of Geriatric Emergency Department Accreditation (GEDA) program and care processes instituted at accredited geriatric emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We analyzed a cross-section of a cohort of US EDs that received GEDA from May 2018 to March 2021. We obtained data from the American College of Emergency Physicians and publicly available sources. Data included GEDA level, geographic location, urban/rural designation, and care processes instituted. Frequencies and proportions and median and interquartile ranges were used to summarize categorical and continuous data, respectively. RESULTS: Over the study period, 225 US geriatric ED accreditations were issued and included in our analysis-14 Level 1, 21 Level 2, and 190 Level 3 geriatric EDs; 5 geriatric EDs reapplied and received higher-level accreditation after initial accreditation at a lower level. Only 9 geriatric EDs were in rural regions. There was significant heterogeneity in protocols enacted at geriatric EDs; minimizing urinary catheter use and fall prevention were the most common. CONCLUSION: There has been rapid growth in geriatric EDs, driven by Level 3 accreditation. Most geriatric EDs are in urban areas, indicating the potential need for expansion beyond these areas. Future research evaluating the impact of GEDA on health care utilization and patient-oriented outcomes is needed.

Concepts in Practice: Geriatric Emergency Departments.

In 2018, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) began accrediting facilities as "geriatric emergency departments" (EDs) according to adherence to the multiorganizational guidelines published in 2014. The guidelines were developed to help every ED improve its care of older adults. The geriatric ED guideline recommendations span the care continuum from out-of-hospital care, ED staffing, protocols, infrastructure, and transitions to outpatient care. Hospitals interested in making their EDs more geriatric friendly thus face the challenge of adopting, adapting, and implementing extensive guideline recommendations in a cost-effective manner and within the capabilities of their facilities and staff. Because all innovation is at heart local and must function within the constraints of local resources, different hospital systems have developed implementation processes for the geriatric ED guidelines according to their differing institutional capabilities and resources. This article describes 4 geriatric ED models of care to provide practical examples and guidance for institutions considering developing geriatric EDs: a geriatric ED-specific unit, geriatrics practitioner models, geriatric champions, and geriatric-focused observation units. The advantages and limitations of each model are compared and examples of specific institutions and their operational metrics are provided.

A National Dataset Analysis of older adults in emergency department observation units.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) Observation Units (Obs Units) are prevalent in the US, but little is known regarding older adults in observation. Our objective was to describe the Obs Units nationally and observation patients with specific attention to differences in care with increasing age. DESIGN: This is an analysis of 2010-2013 data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), a national observational cohort study including ED patients. Weighted means are presented for continuous data and weighted percent for categorical data. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with placement in and admission from observation. RESULTS: The number of adult ED visits varied from 100 million to 107 million per year and 2.3% of patients were placed in observation. Adults ≥65 years old made up a disproportionate number of Obs Unit patients, 30.6%, compared to only 19.7% of total ED visits (odds ratio 1.5 (95% CI 1.5-1.6), adjusting for sex, race, month, day of week, payer source, and hospital region). The overall admission rate from observation was 35.6%, ranging from 31.3% for ages 18-64 years to 47.5% for adults ≥85 years old (p < 0.001). General symptoms (e.g., nausea, dizziness) and hypertensive disease were the most common diagnoses overall. Older adults varied from younger adults in that they were frequently observed for diseases of the urinary system (ICD-9 590-599) and metabolic disorders (ICD-9 270-279). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults are more likely to be cared for in Obs Units. Older adults are treated for different medical conditions than younger adults.

The feasibility of an inter-professional transitions of care service in an older adult population.

BACKGROUND: Older adults discharged from the Emergency Department (ED) are at high risk for medication interactions and side effects; examples of practice models addressing this transition of care are lacking. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study for adults in one of two urban community EDs. Patients ≥50 years of age discharged with at least one new, non-schedule II prescription medication were included. Patients had the option of three transitions of care services: 1) pharmacist-only with home delivery of discharge medications and full medication reconciliation, 2) pharmacist and home health care, including home delivery, medication reconciliation, and a visit from a home health nurse, or 3) either of the above without home delivery. RESULTS: Over seven months, 440 ED patients were screened. Of those, 43 patients were eligible, and three patients elected to join the study. All three patients selected pharmacy-only. Identified barriers to enrollment include the rate of schedule II prescriptions from the ED (53% of potential patients) and high patient loyalty to their community pharmacist. CONCLUSIONS: A pharmacy and home health care transitions of care program was not feasible at an urban community ED. While the pharmacist team identified and managed multiple medication issues, most patients did not qualify due to prescriptions ineligible for delivery. Patients did not want pharmacist or home health nurse involvement in their post ED visit care, many due to loyalty to their community pharmacy. Multiple barriers must be addressed to create a successful inter-professional transition of care model.

Beyond observation: Protocols and capabilities of an Emergency Department Observation Unit.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency Department Observation Units (Obs Units) provide a setting and a mechanism for further care of Emergency Department (ED) patients. Our hospital has a protocol-driven, type 1, complex 20 bed Obs Unit with 36 different protocols. We wanted to understand how the different protocols performed and what types of care were provided. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved, retrospective chart review study. A random 10% of ED patient charts with a "transfer to observation" order were selected monthly from October 2015 through June 2017. This database was designed to identify high and low functioning protocols based on length of stays (LOS) and admission rates. RESULTS: Over 20 months, a total of 984 patients qualified for the study. The average age was 49.5 ±â€¯17.2 years, 57.3% were women, and 32.3% were non-Caucasian. The admission rate was 23.5% with an average LOS in observation of 13.7 h [95% CI 13.3-14.1]. Thirty day return rate was 16.8% with 5.3% of the patients returning to the ED within the first 72 h. Thirty six different protocols were used, with the most common being chest pain (13.9%) and general (13.2%). Almost 70% received a consultation from another service, and 7.2% required a procedure while in observation. Procedures included fluoroscopic-guided lumbar punctures, endoscopies, dental extractions, and catheter replacements (nephrostomy, gastrostomy, and biliary tubes). CONCLUSIONS: An Obs Unit can care for a wide variety of patients who require multiple consultations, procedures, and care coordination while maintaining an acceptable length of stay and admission rate.

Early geriatric consultation increases adherence to TQIP Geriatric Trauma Management Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons' Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) Geriatric Trauma Management Guidelines recommend geriatric consultation for injured older adults. However it is not known how or whether geriatric consultation improves compliance to these quality measures. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of our institutional trauma databank. Adherence to quality measures was compared before and after implementation of specific triggers for geriatric consultation. Secondary analyses evaluated adherence by service: trauma service (Trauma) or a trauma service with early geriatric consultation (GeriTrauma). RESULTS: The average age of the 245 patients was 76.7 years, 47% were women, and mean Injury Severity Score was 9.5 (SD ±8.1). Implementation of the GeriTrauma collaborative increased geriatric consultation rates from 2% to 48% but had minimal effect on overall adherence to TQIP quality measures. A secondary analysis comparing those in the post implementation group who received geriatric consultation (n = 94) to those who did not (n = 103) demonstrated higher rates of delirium diagnosis (36.2% vs 14.6%, P < 0.01) and better documentation of initial living situation, code status, and medication list in the GeriTrauma group. Physical therapy was consulted more frequently for GeriTrauma patients (95.7% vs 68.0%, P < 0.01) Documented goals of care discussions were rare and difficult to abstract. A subgroup analysis of only patients with fall-related injuries demonstrated similar outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Early geriatric consultation increases adherence to TQIP guidelines. Further research into the long term significance and validity of these geriatric trauma quality indicators is needed.

Are triage questions sufficient to assign fall risk precautions in the ED?

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Emergency Physicians Geriatric Emergency Department (ED) Guidelines and the Center for Disease Control recommend that older adults be assessed for risk of falls. The standard ED assessment is a verbal query of fall risk factors, which may be inadequate. We hypothesized that the addition of a functional balance test endorsed by the Center for Disease Control Stop Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries Falls Prevention Guidelines, the 4-Stage Balance Test (4SBT), would improve the detection of patients at risk for falls. METHODS: Prospective pilot study of a convenience sample of ambulatory adults 65 years and older in the ED. All participants received the standard nursing triage fall risk assessment. After patients were stabilized in their ED room, the 4SBT was administered. RESULTS: The 58 participants had an average age of 74.1 years (range, 65-94), 40.0% were women, and 98% were community dwelling. Five (8.6%) presented to the ED for a fall-related chief complaint. The nursing triage screen identified 39.7% (n=23) as at risk for falls, whereas the 4SBT identified 43% (n=25). Combining triage questions with the 4SBT identified 60.3% (n=35) as at high risk for falls, as compared with 39.7% (n=23) with triage questions alone (P<.01). Ten (17%) of the patients at high risk by 4SBT and missed by triage questions were inpatients unaware that they were at risk for falls (new diagnoses). CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating a quick functional test of balance into the ED assessment for fall risk is feasible and significantly increases the detection of older adults at risk for falls.

Emergency department recidivism in adults older than 65 years treated for fractures.

OBJECTIVES: Fractures in older adults are a commonly diagnosed injury in the emergency department (ED). We performed a retrospective medical record review to determine the rate of return to the same ED within 72 hours (returns) and the risk factors associated with returning. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review of patients at least 65 years old discharged from a large, academic ED with a new diagnosis of upper extremity, lower extremity, or rib fractures was performed. Risk factors analyzed included demographic data, type of fracture, analgesic prescriptions, assistive devices provided, other concurrent injuries, and comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index). Our primary outcome was return to the ED within 72 hours. RESULTS: Three hundred fifteen patients qualified. Most fractures were in the upper extremity (64% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 58%-69%]). Twenty patients (6.3% [95% CI, 3.9%-9.6%]) returned within 72 hours. Most returns (15/20, 75%) were for reasons associated with the fracture itself, such as cast problems and inadequate pain control. Only 3 (<1% of all patients) patients returned for cardiac etiologies. Patients with distal forearm fractures had higher return rates (10.7% vs 4.5%, P = .03), and most commonly returned for cast or splint problems. Age, sex, other injuries, assistive devices, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score (median, 1 [interquartile range, 1-2] for both groups) did not predict 72-hour returns. CONCLUSION: Older adults with distal forearm fractures may have more unscheduled health care usage in the first 3 days after fracture diagnosis than older adults with other fracture types. Overall, revisits for cardiac reasons or repeat falls were rare (<1%).

Automating risk stratification for geriatric syndromes in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric emergency department (GED) guidelines endorse screening older patients for geriatric syndromes in the ED, but there have been significant barriers to widespread implementation. The majority of screening programs require engagement of a clinician, nurse, or social worker, adding to already significant workloads at a time of record-breaking ED patient volumes, staff shortages, and hospital boarding crises. Automated, electronic health record (EHR)-embedded risk stratification approaches may be an alternate solution for extending the reach of the GED mission by directing human actions to a smaller subset of higher risk patients. METHODS: We define the concept of automated risk stratification and screening using existing EHR data. We discuss progress made in three potential use cases in the ED: falls, cognitive impairment, and end-of-life and palliative care, emphasizing the importance of linking automated screening with systems of healthcare delivery. RESULTS: Research progress and operational deployment vary by use case, ranging from deployed solutions in falls screening to algorithmic validation in cognitive impairment and end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: Automated risk stratification offers a potential solution to one of the most pressing problems in geriatric emergency care: identifying high-risk populations of older adults most appropriate for specific GED care. Future work is needed to realize the promise of improved care with less provider burden by creating tools suitable for widespread deployment as well as best practices for their implementation and governance.

Nursing Home to Emergency Care Transition Form Has Limited Uptake But Improves Documentation.

Critical information gaps exist in nursing home-to-emergency department (NH-ED) transfer documentation. Standardization of forms may address these gaps. In a single state, a Continuity of Care Acute Care Transfer (CoC) Form was standardized and mandated to be used for all NH-ED transfers. The objective of this study was to evaluate adoption and effectiveness of the standardized CoC form. We used a random cross-sectional sample of 2019-2022 electronic health record encounter data to determine NH-ED documentation completeness after standardized CoC form implementation. Using patient characteristic adjusted linear and logistic regressions, we examined if CoC form standardization was associated with the number of key elements present on NH-ED transfer documentation and hospital admission, respectively. We then compared documentation completeness (out of 15 key data elements) to previously published pre-implementation data (2015-2016, n = 474). Of the 203 NH-ED transfer visits after CoC standardization (2019-2022), mean patient age was 81.8 years and 41.4% had dementia. Any NH-ED transfer form was present for 80.8% (n = 164) of encounters and 28.6% (n = 58) used the standardized CoC form. In comparison with the 2015-2016 data, there was an increase in documentation for functional baseline (20% to 30%), cognitive baseline (25% to 37%), and reason for transfer (25% to 82%). Post implementation, the use of the standardized CoC form was (1) associated with 2.55 (95% CI, 1.66-3.44) more key data elements documented and (2) not associated with a decreased odds of admission [odds ratio (OR), 1.06; 95% CI, 0.54-2.05] after controlling for confounders. Implementation of a statewide standardized CoC form for NH-ED transfers improved documentation of key elements, yet significant information gaps remain. Implementation evaluation is needed to identify how to achieve greater uptake of the form and improve the quality of information exchange between NHs and EDs.

Geriatric screening in the emergency department increases consultations to geriatric medicine and physical and occupational therapy: A pre/post cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Geriatric Emergency Department (ED) Guidelines recommend screening older patients for need for evaluation by geriatric medicine, physical therapy (PT), and occupational therapy (OT), but explicit evidence that geriatric screening changes care compared to physician gestalt is lacking. We assessed changes in multidisciplinary consultation after implementation of standardized geriatric screening in the ED. METHODS: Retrospective single-site observational cohort of older adult ED patients from 2019 to 2023 with three time periods: (1) preimplementation, (2) implementation of geriatric screening, and (3) postimplementation. Geriatric, PT, and OT consultations/referrals were available during all time periods. Descriptive analysis was stratified by disposition: discharged, observation and discharged, observation and hospital admission, and hospital admission. The independent variable was completion of three geriatric screening tools by ED nurses. The dependent variable was consultation and/or referral to geriatrics, PT, and OT. Secondary outcomes were disposition, ED revisits, and 30-day rehospitalizations. RESULTS: There were 57,775 qualifying ED visits of patients age ≥ 65 years during the time periods: implementation increased geriatric screening from 0.5% to 63.2%; postimplementation, discharge patients who received screening had more consultations/referrals to geriatrics (1.5% vs. 0.4%), PT (7.9% vs. 1.9%), and OT (6.5% vs. 1.2%) compared to unscreened patients. Patients observed and then discharged had more consultations/referrals to geriatrics (15.1% vs. 11.3%), PT (74.1% vs. 64.5%), and OT (65.7% vs. 56.5%). Admitted patients had no change in consultation rates. Geriatric screening was not associated with a change in 7-day ED revisits for discharged patients but was associated with decreased revisits for patients discharged from observation (11.6% vs. 42.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Geriatric screening was associated with increased consultations/referrals to geriatrics, PT, and OT in the ED and ED observation unit. This suggests that geriatric screening changes ED care for older adults.

Integration of Geriatric Education Within the American Board of Emergency Medicine Model.

Background: Emergency medicine (EM) resident training is guided by the American Board of Emergency Medicine Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine (EM Model) and the EM Milestones as developed based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) list. These are consensus documents developed by a collaborative working group of seven national EM organizations. External experts in geriatric EM also developed competency recommendations for EM residency education in geriatrics, but these are not being taught in many residency programs. Our objective was to evaluate how the geriatric EM competencies integrate/overlap with the EM Model and KSAs to help residency programs include them in their educational curricula. Methods: Trained emergency physicians independently mapped the geriatric resident competencies onto the 2019 EM Model items and the 2021 KSAs using Excel spreadsheets. Discrepancies were resolved by an independent reviewer with experience with the EM Model development and resident education, and the final mapping was reviewed by all team members. Results: The EM Model included 77% (20/26) of the geriatric competencies. The KSAs included most of the geriatric competencies (81%, 21/26). All but one of the geriatric competencies mapped onto either the EM Model or the KSAs. Within the KSAs, most of the geriatric competencies mapped onto necessary level skills (ranked B, C, D, or E) with only five (8%) also mapping onto advanced skills (ranked A). Conclusion: All but one of the geriatric EM competencies mapped to the current EM Model and KSAs. The geriatric competencies correspond to knowledge at all levels of training within the KSAs, from beginner to expert in EM. Educators in EM can use this mapping to integrate the geriatric competencies within their curriculums.

Integrating Hospice and Palliative Medicine Education Within the American Board of Emergency Medicine Model.

Background: Hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) is a board-certified subspecialty within emergency medicine (EM), but prior studies have shown that EM residents do not receive sufficient training in HPM. Experts in HPM-EM created a consensus list of competencies for HPM training in EM residency. We evaluated how the HPM competencies integrate within the American Board of Emergency Medicine Milestones, which include the Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine (EM Model) and the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) list. Methods: Three emergency physicians independently mapped the HPM-EM competencies onto the 2019 EM Model items and the 2021 KSAs. Discrepancies were resolved by a fourth independent reviewer, and the final mapping was reviewed by all team members. Results: The EM Model included 78% (18/23) of the HPM competencies as a direct match, and we identified recommended areas for incorporating the other five. The KSAs included 43% (10/23). Most HPM competencies included in the KSAs mapped onto at least one level B (minimal necessary for competency) KSA. Three HPM competencies were not clearly included in the EM Model or in the KSAs (treating end-of-life symptoms, caring for the imminently dying, and caring for patients under hospice care). Conclusion: The majority of HPM-EM competencies are included in the current EM Model and KSAs and correspond to knowledge needed to be competent in EM. Programs relying on the EM Milestones to plan their curriculums may miss training in symptom management and care for patients at the end of life or who are on hospice.

Enhancing healthcare access for an older population: The age-friendly emergency department.

Healthcare systems face significant challenges in meeting the unique needs of older adults, particularly in the acute setting. Age-friendly healthcare is a comprehensive approach using the 4Ms framework-what matters, medications, mentation, and mobility-to ensure that healthcare settings are responsive to the needs of older patients. The Age-Friendly Emergency Department (AFED) is a crucial component of a holistic age-friendly health system. Our objective is to provide an overview of the AFED model, its core principles, and the benefits to older adults and healthcare clinicians. The AFED optimizes the delivery of emergency care by integrating age-specific considerations into various aspects of (1) ED physical infrastructure, (2) clinical care policies, and (3) care transitions. Physical infrastructure incorporates environmental modifications to enhance patient safety, including adequate lighting, nonslip flooring, and devices for sensory and ambulatory impairment. Clinical care policies address the physiological, cognitive, and psychosocial needs of older adults while preserving focus on emergency issues. Care transitions include communication and involving community partners and case management services. The AFED prioritizes collaboration between interdisciplinary team members (ED clinicians, geriatric specialists, nurses, physical/occupational therapists, and social workers). By adopting an age-friendly approach, EDs have the potential to improve patient-centered outcomes, reduce adverse events and hospitalizations, and enhance functional recovery. Moreover, healthcare clinicians benefit from the AFED model through increased satisfaction, multidisciplinary support, and enhanced training in geriatric care. Policymakers, healthcare administrators, and clinicians must collaborate to standardize guidelines, address barriers to AFEDs, and promote the adoption of age-friendly practices in the ED.