Beyond chest pain: Incremental value of other variables to identify patients for an early ECG.

BACKGROUND: Chest pain (CP) is the hallmark symptom for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) but is not reported in 20-30% of patients, especially women, elderly, non-white patients, presenting to the emergency department (ED) with an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: We used a retrospective 5-year adult ED sample of 279,132 patients to explore using CP alone to predict ACS, then we incrementally added other ACS chief complaints, age, and sex in a series of multivariable logistic regression models. We evaluated each model's identification of ACS and STEMI. RESULTS: Using CP alone would recommend ECGs for 8% of patients (sensitivity, 61%; specificity, 92%) but missed 28.4% of STEMIs. The model with all variables identified ECGs for 22% of patients (sensitivity, 82%; specificity, 78%) but missed 14.7% of STEMIs. The model with CP and other ACS chief complaints had the highest sensitivity (93%) and specificity (55%), identified 45.1% of patients for ECG, and only missed 4.4% of STEMIs. CONCLUSION: CP alone had highest specificity but lacked sensitivity. Adding other ACS chief complaints increased sensitivity but identified 2.2-fold more patients for ECGs. Achieving an ECG in 10 min for patients with ACS to identify all STEMIs will be challenging without introducing more complex risk calculation into clinical care.

ED Patient Experience: Does Day of the Week or Time of the Day Matter?

The effect of the arrival day of the week, arrival time of the day, or discharge time of the day on emergency department (ED) patient experience (PE) scores has not been well studied. We performed a retrospective analysis of ED patients between July 1st, 2018 through March 31st, 2021. We recorded demographics, PE scores, arrival day, arrival and discharge times, and total ED and perceived ED times. We performed univariate and multivariable analyses. We sent 49,849 surveys and received back 2423 that we included in our study. The responding patients' median age was 52, with a majority of female gender (62%) and white race (57%). The average arrival time was 1:40 PM, and the average discharge time 2:38 PM. The average total ED time was 261 minutes, while the average perceived ED time was 540 minutes. We found a statistical association between worse PE scores and longer actual ED time but not longer perceived time. A later arrival time was significantly associated with worse PE scores on 4 out of 6 domains of the PE questionnaire. The discharge time and the day of the week were not significantly associated with PE scores. Conclusion: Actual longer ED time was significantly associated with worse PE scores, but not perceived time. Later arrival time was associated with worse PE scores, but not later discharge time. The arrival day of the week was not statistically associated with differences in PE. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms after respiratory and cardiovascular emergencies predict risk of hospital readmission: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Twenty-five percent of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) for a respiratory or cardiovascular medical emergency develop clinically significant posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. It is possible that development of PTSD symptoms in this cohort is associated with subsequent adverse physical health events. Our objective was to test whether clinically significant PTSD symptoms 30 days postdischarge are associated with increased risk for hospital readmission within 24 months after discharge among patients presenting to the ED for a respiratory or cardiovascular emergency. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study conducted between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, at a U.S. academic medical center, including adult patients presenting with acute respiratory failure or cardiovascular instability requiring a potentially life-sustaining intervention in the ED. PTSD symptoms 30 days postdischarge were measured using the PTSD Checklist for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5. The primary outcome was all-cause hospital readmission over the subsequent 24 months after hospital discharge from the index ED visit. RESULTS: Of the 99 patients included, 73% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 63% to 81%) had a hospital readmission within 24 months. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for potential confounders (e.g., age, severity of illness during index ED visit, preexisting comorbid conditions) presence of clinically significant PTSD symptoms at 30 days was independently associated with increased risk for all-cause hospital readmission at 24 months (hazards ratio = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.30 to 3.69). These results remained statistically significant across multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital readmission is common among survivors of acute respiratory failure and cardiovascular instability, and PTSD symptoms 30 days postdischarge are an independent predictor of hospital readmission. Survivors of medical emergencies may warrant follow-up evaluation for PTSD symptoms, and future research is warranted to better understand the relationship between psychological trauma and hospital readmission.

Association of Emergency Department Waiting Times With Patient Experience in Admitted and Discharged Patients.

Prolonged waiting times are associated with worse patient experience in patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). However, it is unclear which component of the waiting times is most impactful to the patient experience and the impact on hospitalized patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of ED patients between July 2018 and March 30, 2020. In all, 3278 patients were included: 1477 patients were discharged from the ED, and 1680 were admitted. Discharged patients had a longer door-to-first provider and door-to-doctor time, but a shorter doctor-to-disposition, disposition-to-departure, and total ED time when compared to admitted patients. Some, but not all, components of waiting times were significantly higher in patients with suboptimal experience (<100th percentile). Prolonged door-to-doctor time was significantly associated with worse patient experience in discharged patients and in patients with hospital length of stay ≤4 days. Prolonged ED waiting times were significantly associated with worse patient experience in patients who were discharged from the ED and in inpatients with short length of stay. Door-to-doctor time seems to have the highest impact on the patient's experience of these 2 groups.

Intravenous Fluid for the Treatment of Emergency Department Patients With Migraine Headache: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility and necessity of performing a large-scale trial to measure the effect of intravenous fluid therapy on migraine headache pain. METHODS: This was a single-center, pilot randomized controlled trial. We randomized adult emergency department migraine headache patients to receive 1 L of normal saline solution during 1 hour (fluid group) or saline solution at 10 mL/hour for 1 hour (control group). All patients received intravenous prochlorperazine and diphenhydramine at the start of fluid administration. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded; nurses administering the intervention were not. Outcomes were assessed at 60 and 120 minutes, and 48 hours. The primary outcome was the difference in the verbal pain rating (on a scale of 0 to 10) between 0 and 60 minutes. Key secondary outcomes included additional clinical endpoints, the rate of protocol completion, and the effectiveness of blinding. RESULTS: Fifty patients consented to participate; one withdrew, leaving 25 patients randomized to the fluid group and 24 in the no fluid group. The mean improvement in 0- to 60-minute pain score was 4.5 (95% confidence interval 3.7 to 5.3) in the fluid group and 4.9 (95% confidence interval 3.5 to 6.2) in the control group. Primary outcome data were collected for 49 of 50 enrolled patients, and only one participant correctly identified the group assignment. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed no statistically significant treatment effect from fluid administration, but does not exclude the possibility of a clinically important treatment effect. The study protocol and approach to blinding are both feasible and effective.