Pediatric Emergency Medicine Physicians' Perspectives on Emergency Care of Children With Medical Complexity: A Multi-institution Mixed-Methods Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Children with medical complexity (CMC) compose 1% of the pediatric population but account for 20% of pediatric emergency department (ED) visits. Previous descriptions of challenges and interventions to ensure quality of care are limited. Our objective was to elicit pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians' perspectives on challenges and opportunities for improvement of emergency care of CMC, with a focus on emergency information forms (EIFs). METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of PEM physicians participating the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine Survey listserv. The survey was designed using an expert panel, and subsequently piloted and revised to an 18-item survey. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one of 495 respondents (30%) completed the survey. Most respondents (62.9%) reported caring for >10 CMC per month. Whereas overall medical fragility and time constraints were major contributors to the challenges of caring for CMC in the ED, communication with known providers and shared care plans were identified as particularly helpful. Most respondents did not report routine use of EIFs. Anticipated emergencies/action plan was deemed the most important component of EIFs. CONCLUSIONS: Most PEM physicians view the care for CMC in the ED as challenging despite practicing in high-resource environments. Further research is needed to develop and implement strategies to improve care of CMC in the ED. Understanding experiences of providers in general ED settings is also an important next step given that 80% of CMC present for emergency care outside of major children's hospitals.

Validation of field assessment stroke triage for emergency destination for prehospital use in a rural EMS system.

BACKGROUND: Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED) is a simple and accurate prehospital stroke severity scale that has been shown to have comparable accuracy to the gold standard National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) but requires further field validation for use by emergency medical services (EMS), particularly in rural systems. FAST-ED scores ≥4 are considered high probability for large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes, while scores <4 are low to moderate probability for LVO. The objective of this study was to assess inter-rater reliability of the EMS FAST-ED (EMS) score to the emergency department FAST-ED (ED-MD) scores. METHODS: EMS calculated FAST-ED scores prior to transport to the emergency department (ED) on patients with a positive prehospital stroke screen. EDMD calculated FAST-ED scores for the same patients upon arrival to the ED. Interrater reliability and test characteristics were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were included in this study and 14 were subsequently diagnosed with an LVO. EMS assigned 34 patients (35.8%) a FAST-ED score of ≥4. EDMD assigned 25 patients (26.3%) a FAST-ED score of ≥4. Using the clinical cut-points of FAST-ED scores <4 and ≥ 4, a linearly weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient showed moderate interrater reliability when comparing EMS and EDMD scores (kw 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.63). At ≥4, EMS FAST-ED scores had a sensitivity 0.48, specificity 0.75, PPV 0.62, NPV 0.62 for predicting an LVO, while EDMD FAST-ED scores had a sensitivity 0.36, specificity 0.82, PPV 0.64, NPV 0.60. Comparable receiver operator curve area under the curve values were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: EMS and EDMD FAST-ED scores were moderately comparable in a rural EMS system. Similar NPVs compared to EDMD suggest the use of FAST-ED as an appropriate screening tool for EMS to predict the probability of LVO in the prehospital setting and make destination determinations regarding primary transport to a thrombectomy-capable stroke center.