Variations of pain medication use for patients with acute extremity pain in an emergency department: A quality improvement project.

OBJECTIVE: The opioid epidemic continues to take over 50,000 lives annually. At least 75 percent of patients present to an emergency department (ED) for pain. The objective of this study is to describe the characteristic(s) for receiving opioid, non-opioid, and combination analgesics in an ED for acute extremity pain. METHODS: A single-site, retrospective chart audit was conducted at a community-based teaching hospital. Patients ≥ 18 years old who were discharged from the ED with acute extremity pain and received at least one analgesic were included. Primary goal included determining characteristics associated with the prescribing of analgesics. Secondary goals included amount of pain score reduction, frequency of prescribing, and discharge prescription patterns among each group. Analyses consisted of univariate and multivariate general linear models analyses. RESULTS: There were 878 patients identified as having acute extremity pain between February and April 2019. A total of 335 patients met inclusion criteria and were separated into three groups: nonopioids (n = 200), opioids (n = 97), and combination analgesics (n = 38). The individual characteristics showing statistical differences (p < 0.05) between the groups were (1) an allergy to specific analgesics, (2) diastolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg, (3) heart rate > 100 bpm, (4) opioid use prior to ED admission, (5) prescriber level, and (6) discharge diagnosis. Multivariate analyses showed combination therapy (regardless of which two analgesics were administered) had a significant difference in mean pain score reduction compared to nonopioids (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: There are patient, prescriber, and environment-specific characteristics that are associated with analgesic selection in an ED. Combination therapy had the greatest reduction in pain regardless of the two medications received.

Treatment of Acute Bronchitis and its Impact on Return Emergency Department Visits.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are not recommended in healthy, uncomplicated adults for the treatment of acute bronchitis, yet are still often prescribed. No randomized studies have examined whether prescribing antibiotics in the emergency department (ED) impacts hospital return rates. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare hospital return rates between those who were prescribed an antibiotic vs. those who were not prescribed an antibiotic for the treatment of acute bronchitis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was completed evaluating patients aged 18-64 years who presented to a community teaching hospital ED with acute bronchitis between January 2017 and December 2019. The primary outcomes were 30-day ED return and hospital admissions from initial ED visit. The rates of ED return or readmitted were compared for patients prescribed an antibiotic for treatment of acute bronchitis vs. those patients who were not prescribed an antibiotic. RESULTS: Of the 752 patients included, 311 (41%) were prescribed antibiotics. Baseline demographics were similar between both groups. Of those prescribed an antibiotic, 26 of 311 (8.4%) returned to the hospital within 30 days compared with 33 of 441 patients (7.5%) who were not prescribed an antibiotic (odds ratio 1.13; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.92). CONCLUSIONS: There was no association found between antibiotic therapy for treatment of acute bronchitis and return to the hospital.

Informing the development of a transitions of care program between an emergency department and regional supermarket chain pharmacies.

OBJECTIVES: Pharmacist collaboration in transitions of care (TOC) programs is integral to increase patient education and adherence after discharge. This study aimed to conduct a qualitative evaluation of stakeholder perspectives to inform the design and implementation of a TOC program between an emergency department (ED) and regional supermarket chain pharmacies. METHODS: Pharmacies from a regional supermarket chain were identified for inclusion on the basis of geographic proximity to a local community hospital ED. Semistructured, one-on-one interviews with the primary investigator were conducted. Interview questions were based on the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The following 5 CFIR domains were used: (1) intervention characteristics, (2) outer setting, (3) inner setting, (4) characteristics of individuals, and (5) process. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Two investigators coded each transcript independently. A thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 19 interviews were conducted, and the following 7 major themes emerged on analysis: (1) enhance real-time interprofessional communication, (2) establish data sharing between the ED and the community pharmacy, (3) provide timely resolution of prescription insurance issues for new therapies post-ED discharge, (4) use off-site pharmacy resources to support community pharmacy workflow, (5) increase patient education to prevent primary medication nonadherence, (6) reinforce discharge care plans, and (7) focus on community-dwelling older adult patients in an ED care transition program. CONCLUSION: Health care providers including pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and care managers, view an ED-to-community pharmacy TOC program as a valuable service to increase patient education on new medications and discharge planning. Establishment of data sharing and reimbursement is integral to the development, implementation, and sustainability of such programs. There is an untapped opportunity for community pharmacists to bridge the gap in care after ED discharge.

Improving Pain Reassessment and Documentation Rates: A Quality Improvement Project in a Teaching Hospital's Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: ED pain score reassessment and documentation rates were drastically low according to sampled data from the St. Margaret Hospital Emergency Department, leading to difficult pain management encounters for clinicians. The purpose of this project was to improve pain score reassessment rates in ED patients who were discharged with extremity pain. METHODS: This project was an 8-month, pre-postinterventional (preintervention: September-November 2018, intervention: December 2018-January 2019, and postintervention: February-April 2019) quality improvement project that took place in a community hospital emergency department. Emergency nurses participated in 6 focus groups, allowing for the creation of focus group-themed interventions at the request of the nursing staff. Daily audits of pain reassessment and documentation rates for individual nurses took place during the month of January 2019. In addition, a weekly newsletter was created and reported the ED pain reassessment and documentation rates. RESULTS: All patient encounters (581) were reviewed over the 8-month period. Baseline pain score reassessment and documentation rates were 36.2% (confidence interval, 30.3%-42.3%) in the emergency department. Pain reassessment and documentation rates increased to 62.3% (confidence interval, 56.8%-67.6%) during the 3-month postintervention period. DISCUSSION: Implementing daily audits and weekly newsletters that created transparency of individual and group performances increased pain score reassessment and documentation rates.

Impact of Electronic Physician Order-Set on Antibiotic Ordering Time in Septic Patients in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a serious medical condition that can lead to organ dysfunction and death. Research shows that each hour delay in antibiotic administration increases mortality. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundles created standards to assist in the timely treatment of patients with suspected sepsis to improve outcomes and reduce mortality. OBJECTIVE: This article determines if the use of an electronic physician order-set decreases time to antibiotic ordering for patients with sepsis in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on adult patients who presented to the ED of four community hospitals from May to July 2016. Patients with severe sepsis and/or septic shock were included. Primary outcome was the difference in time to antibiotic ordering in patients whose physicians utilized the order-set versus those whose physicians did not. Secondary outcomes included differences in time to antibiotic administration, time to lactate test, hospital length of stay, and posthospitalization disposition. The institution's Quality Improvement Committee approved the project. RESULTS: Forty-five of 123 patients (36.6%) with sepsis had physicians who used the order-set. Order-set utilization reduced the mean time to ordering antibiotics by 20 minutes (99 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 69-128 vs. 119 minutes, 95% CI: 91-147), but this finding was not statistically significant. Mean time to antibiotic administration (145 minutes, 95% CI: 108-181 vs. 182 minutes, 95% CI: 125-239) and median time to lactate tests (12 minutes, 95% CI: 0-20 vs. 19 minutes, 95% CI: 8-34), although in the direction of the hypotheses, were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Utilization of the order-set was associated with a potentially clinically significant, but not statistically significant, reduced time to antibiotic ordering in patients with sepsis. Electronic order-sets are a promising tool to assist hospitals with meeting the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services core measure.