Pilot Study for Assessing Nontechnical Skills in Emergency Medicine Residents: Why We Should C.A.R.E.

Background: The growing regulatory and hospital focus on patient experience and patient satisfaction is evidenced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services implementation of Hospital Value-Based Purchasing and by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education milestones. However, there is a paucity of data examining the education and evaluation of emergency medicine residents' nontechnical skills (eg, communication and situational awareness) as they relate to patient interactions. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate a nontechnical skills rating tool with emergency medicine residents during their interactions with patients. Methods: As part of the educational initiative, the authors consulted with a hospitality training and measurement company, the Freeman Group, that developed and trained faculty on the use of an observational tool to assess physicians' nontechnical skills. Nontechnical skills were assessed in 4 domains designated by the acronym C.A.R.E.: connect with the patient, adjust the interaction to meet patient needs, resolve patient requests, and empathize with the patient. Faculty observed emergency medicine residents as they interacted clinically with patients in the emergency department and rated them on a binary scale: acceptable or unacceptable. Results: Thirty-four of 36 residents were observed. Our study demonstrates that the residents performed very well on domains of empathy, adjusting to patients' knowledge, and resolving requests. However, residents' abilities to customize conversations to patients (eg, addressing patients appropriately and establishing and maintaining rapport) were rated as unacceptable 31% of the time. Conclusion: Overall, residents performed well on most aspects of nontechnical skills observed during their interactions with patients. However, even when residents were mindful of faculty observing nontechnical skills, they performed unacceptably in their communication with patients in approximately one-third of the interactions. This study provides important insight into nontechnical skill areas that may be influenced with intervention to improve patient interactions, and ultimately, influence patient satisfaction.

Assessment of a cellular host response test to risk-stratify suspected COVID-19 patients in the Emergency Department setting.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the IntelliSep Index (ISI) for risk stratification of patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) with respiratory symptoms suspected of COVID-19 during the pandemic. METHODS: An observational single-center study of prospective cohort of patients presenting to the ED during the early COVID-19 pandemic with respiratory symptoms and a CBC drawn within 4.5 hours of initial vital signs. A sample of this blood was aliquoted for performance of the ISI, and patients were followed for clinical outcomes. The study required no patient-centered activity beyond standard of care and treating clinicians were unaware of study enrollment and ISI test results. MAIN FINDINGS: 282 patients were included. The ISI ranges 0.1 to 10.0, with three interpretation bands indicating risk of adverse outcome: low (green), 0.1-4.9; intermediate (yellow), 5.0-6.2; and high (red), 6.3-10.0. Of 193 (68.4%) tested for SARS-CoV-2, 96 (49.7%) were positive. The ISI resulted in 182 (64.5%) green, 54 (18.1%) yellow, and 46 (15.6%) red band patients. Green band patients had a 1.1% (n = 2) 3-day mortality, while yellow and red band had 3.7% (n = 2, p > .05) and 10.9% (n = 5, p < .05) 3-day mortalities, respectively. Fewer green band patients required admission (96 [52.7%]) vs yellow (44 [81.5%]) and red (43 [93.5%]). Green band patients had more hospital free days (median 23 (Q1-Q3 20-25) than yellow (median 22 [Q1-Q3 0-23], p < 0.05) and red (median 21 [Q1-Q3 0-24], p < 0.01). SOFA increased with interpretation band: green (2, [Q1-Q3 0-4]) vs yellow (4, [Q1-Q3 2-5], p < 0.001) and red (5, [Q1-Q3 3-6]) p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The ISI rapidly risk-stratifies patients presenting to the ED during the early COVID-19 pandemic with signs or suspicion of respiratory infection.

Retrospective identification of infection in the emergency department: A significant challenge in sepsis clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: This study examined three methods for retrospectively identifying infection in emergency department (ED) patients: modified objective definitions of infection (MODI) from the CDC/NHSN, physician adjudication determination of infection, and ED treating physician behavior. METHODS: This study used a subset of data from a prospective sepsis trial. We used Fleiss's Kappa to compare agreement between two physicians retrospectively adjudicating infection based on the patient's medical record, modified infection definition from the CDC/NHSN, and ED treating physician behavior. RESULTS: Overall, there was similar agreement between physician adjudication of infection and MODI criteria (Kappa=0.59) compared to having two physicians independently identify infection through retrospective chart review (Kappa=0.58). ED treating physician behavior was a poorer proxy for infection when compared to the MODI criteria (0.41) and physician adjudication (Kappa = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective identification of infection poses a significant challenge in sepsis clinical trials. Using modified definitions of infection provides a standardized, less time consuming, and equally effective means of identifying infection compared to having multiple physicians adjudicate a patient's chart.

Assessment of a Cellular Host Response Test as a Sepsis Diagnostic for Those With Suspected Infection in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. A reliable, rapid, and early indicator can help improve efficiency of care and outcomes. To assess the IntelliSep test, a novel in vitro diagnostic that quantifies the state of immune activation by measuring the biophysical properties of leukocytes, as a rapid diagnostic for sepsis and a measure of severity of illness, as defined by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II scores and the need for hospitalization. DESIGN SETTING SUBJECTS: Adult patients presenting to two emergency departments in Baton Rouge, LA, with signs of infection (two of four systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, with at least one being aberration of temperature or WBC count) or suspicion of infection (a clinician order for culture of a body fluid), were prospectively enrolled. Sepsis status, per Sepsis-3 criteria, was determined through a 3-tiered retrospective and blinded adjudication process consisting of objective review, site-level clinician review, and final determination by independent physician adjudicators. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 266 patients in the final analysis, those with sepsis had higher IntelliSep Index (median = 6.9; interquartile range, 6.1-7.6) than those adjudicated as not septic (median = 4.7; interquartile range, 3.7-5.9; p < 0.001), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 and 0.83 when compared with unanimous and forced adjudication standards, respectively. Patients with higher IntelliSep Index had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (3 [interquartile range, 1-5] vs 1 [interquartile range, 0-2]; p < 0.001) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II (7 [interquartile range, 3.5-11.5] vs 5 [interquartile range, 2-9]; p < 0.05) and were more likely to be admitted to the hospital (83.6% vs 48.3%; p < 0.001) compared with those with lower IntelliSep Index. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting to the emergency department with signs or suspicion of infection, the IntelliSep Index is a promising tool for the rapid diagnosis and risk stratification for sepsis.

Development and validation of a cellular host response test as an early diagnostic for sepsis.

Sepsis must be diagnosed quickly to avoid morbidity and mortality. However, the clinical manifestations of sepsis are highly variable and emergency department (ED) clinicians often must make rapid, impactful decisions before laboratory results are known. We previously developed a technique that allows the measurement of the biophysical properties of white blood cells as they are stretched through a microfluidic channel. In this study we describe and validate the resultant output as a model and score-the IntelliSep Index (ISI)-that aids in the diagnosis of sepsis in patients with suspected or confirmed infection from a single blood draw performed at the time of ED presentation. By applying this technique to a high acuity cohort with a 23.5% sepsis incidence (n = 307), we defined specific metrics-the aspect ratio and visco-elastic inertial response-that are more sensitive than cell size or cell count in predicting disease severity. The final model was trained and cross-validated on the high acuity cohort, and the performance and generalizability of the model was evaluated on a separate low acuity cohort with a 6.4% sepsis incidence (n = 94) and healthy donors (n = 72). For easier clinical interpretation, the ISI is divided into three interpretation bands of Green, Yellow, and Red that correspond to increasing disease severity. The ISI agreed with the diagnosis established by retrospective physician adjudication, and accurately identified subjects with severe illness as measured by SOFA, APACHE-II, hospital-free days, and intensive care unit admission. Measured using routinely collected blood samples, with a short run-time and no requirement for patient or laboratory information, the ISI is well suited to aid ED clinicians in rapidly diagnosing sepsis.

Simulation-Based Education Enhances Patient Safety Behaviors During Central Venous Catheter Placement.

OBJECTIVE: We describe the effect of simulation-based education on residents' adherence to protocols for and performance of central venous access. METHODS: Internal medicine and emergency medicine residents underwent a central venous access course that included a lecture, video presentation, readings, and simulation demonstrations presented by faculty. Baseline data were collected before the course was initiated. After a skills session where they rehearsed their ultrasound-guided central venous access skills, residents were evaluated using a procedural checklist and written knowledge exam. Residents also completed questionnaires regarding confidence in performing ultrasound-guided central venous access and opinions about the training course. RESULTS: Residents demonstrated significant improvement on the written knowledge exam (P < 0.0001) and Standard Protocol Checklist (P < 0.0001) after the training course. Training improved a number of patient safety elements, including adherence to sterile technique, transparent dressing, discarding sharps, and ordering postprocedure x-rays. However, a number of residents failed to wash their hands, prepare with chlorhexidine, drape the patient using a sterile technique, anesthetize the site, and perform a preprocedure time-out. Significant improvement in procedural skills was also noted for reduction in skin-to-vein time (P < 0.003) as well as a reduction in number of residents who punctured the carotid artery (P < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based education significantly improved residents' knowledge and procedural skills along with their confidence. Adherence to the protocol also improved. This study illustrates that simulation-based education can improve patient safety through training and protocols.

Improving Patient Safety Communication in Residency Programs by Incorporating Patient Safety Discussions Into Rounds.

BACKGROUND: Engaging residents in patient safety and quality improvement initiatives is sometimes difficult. The primary goal of the current study was to develop a standardized learning experience designed to facilitate patient safety discussions during rounds. METHODS: Residents who were on inpatient rotations during a 2-month period in 2014 were exposed to patient safety discussions on rounds. Residents who were not on inpatient rotations served as a control group. Faculty received weekly text reminders with 3 questions designed to engage residents in patient safety discussions. Before and after the intervention, residents were asked to complete a modified Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture. Faculty members were asked to complete a brief survey designed by the study investigators. RESULTS: Of the 160 residents who participated in the study, 49 responded to both the preintervention and postintervention surveys (31%). Residents who participated in patient safety discussions during rounds reported higher frequencies of safety events reported compared to the control group (P<0.05). Both groups of residents reported better communication (P<0.01) and an increased number of safety events reported (P<0.01) at the end of the intervention. Twenty-two faculty were surveyed, and 19 responded (86%). Most faculty felt incorporating patient safety discussions on rounds was constructive and that the residents were responsive. Few faculty members felt the patient safety discussions were burdensome. CONCLUSION: Using weekly text reminders with 3 prompts to incorporate patient safety discussions into rounds was well received by faculty and residents and had an impact on communication and error reporting.

Graduate Medical Education as a Lever for Collaborative Change: One Institution's Experience with a Campuswide Patient Safety Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The 2013 closure of a public hospital in Baton Rouge, LA transformed graduate medical education (GME) at Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center (OLOL). Administrators were tasked with incorporating residents into patient safety and quality improvement initiatives to fulfill regulatory obligations. This report outlines our experiences as we built these patient safety and quality improvement initiatives in a rapidly expanding independent academic medical center. METHODS: We joined the Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers (AIAMC) to meet and learn from national peers. To fulfill the scholarly activity requirement of the AIAMC's National Initiative IV, we formed a multidisciplinary team to develop a patient safety education project. Prioritized monthly team meetings allowed for project successes to be celebrated and circulated within the organization. RESULTS: The public-private partnership that more than quadrupled the historic size of GME at OLOL has, in the past 2 years, led to the development of an interdisciplinary team. This team has expanded to accommodate residency program leadership from across the campus. Our National Initiative IV project won a national award and inspired several follow-up initiatives. In addition, this work led to the formation of a Patient Safety and Clinical Quality Improvement fellowship that matched its first fellow in 2015. CONCLUSION: Through the commitment and support of hospital and medical education leaders, as well as a focus on promoting cultural change through scholarly activity, we were able to greatly expand patient safety and quality improvement efforts in our institution.

Smartphones in medicine: emerging practices in an academic medical center.

Advances in mobile phone technology now provide a myriad of resources to physicians' fingertips. However, the medical profession continues to struggle with potential for misuse of these devices. There is a need for better understanding of physicians' uses of smartphones in order to establish guidelines for appropriate and professional behavior. The purpose of the current study was to survey physicians' and medical students' practices concerning smartphone use in the healthcare setting. Physicians and medical students were asked to complete anonymous surveys regarding uses of smartphones within the past month in various healthcare settings. Overall, the participants reported distinctly different patterns in the uses they made of their phones in different settings (P<.001), with most individuals engaging in most behaviors while on break but few using their smartphones while with patients or during procedures. It appears that physicians and medical students make decisions about using their smartphones according to some combination of three considerations: degree of relevance to patient care, the appropriateness of the behavior in front of patients, and the issue of how disruptive that behavior may be.

Optic nerve sheath diameter and lumbar puncture opening pressure in nontrauma patients suspected of elevated intracranial pressure.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if patients with nontraumatic causes of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) could be identified by ultrasound measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD). It was hypothesized that an ONSD greater than or equal to 5 mm would identify patients with elevated ICP. METHOD: This was a prospective observational trial comparing ONSD with ICP measured by opening pressure manometry on lumbar puncture (LP). The cohort consisted of a convenience sample of adult patients presenting to the emergency department, requiring LP. The ONSD measurement was performed before computed tomography and LP. The physician performing the LP was blinded to the result of the ONSD measurement. An opening pressure on manometry of greater than or equal to 20 cm H2O and an ONSD greater than or equal to 5 mm were considered elevated. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included in our study, 24 (47%) with ICP greater than or equal to 20 cm H2O and 27 (53%) with ICP less than 20 cm H2O. The sensitivity of ONSD greater than or equal to 5 for identifying elevated ICP was 75% (95% confidence interval, 53%-90%) with specificity of 44% (25%-65%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.69 (0.54-0.84), suggesting a relationship between ONSD and ICP. CONCLUSION: An ONSD greater than or equal to 5 mm was associated with elevated ICP in nontraumatic causes of elevated ICP. Although a relationship exists, a sensitivity of 75% does not make ONSD measurement an adequate screening examination for elevated ICP in this patient population.