ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recent reports have identified associations between patient race and ethnicity and use of physical restraint while receiving care in the emergency department (ED). However, no study has assessed this relationship in hospitals primarily treating patients of color and underserved populations. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and the use of restraints in an ED population at a minority-serving, safety-net institution. METHODS: For this cross-sectional study, chart review identified all adult patients presenting to the Boston Medical Center ED between January 2018 and April 2021. Generalized estimating equation logistic regression modeling was conducted to evaluate associations between race and use of restraints. RESULTS: Of 348,384 ED visits (22.9% White, 46.7% Black, 23.1% Hispanic), 1852 (0.5%) had an associated physical restraint order. Multivariable models showed significant interactions (p = 0.02) between race/ethnicity, behavioral health diagnosis, and sex on the primary outcome of physical restraint. Stratified analysis revealed that among patients with no behavioral health diagnoses, Black (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.72, p = 0.0003) and Hispanic (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.63, p = 0.0004) patients had lower odds of restraint than White patients. Among female patients with a mental health and/or substance use disorder diagnosis, Black (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.49-2.54, p < 0.0001) and Hispanic (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.49-3.03, p < 0.0001) patients had higher odds of restraint than White patients. Similar trends were observed for Black male patients (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.34-1.91, p < 0.0001) but not for Hispanic male patients (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73-1.26, p = 0.77) with behavioral health diagnoses who had similar odds of restraint to White patients. Additional factors associated with physical restraint include younger age, public or lack of insurance, and ED visits during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparities exist in restraint utilization at this minority-serving safety-net hospital; however, these disparities are modified by sex and by behavioral health diagnoses. The reasons for these disparities may be multifactorial and warrant further investigation.
Subject(s)
Ethnicity , Restraint, Physical , Adult , Humans , Male , Female , United States , Cross-Sectional Studies , Emergency Service, Hospital , Hospitals , Healthcare DisparitiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Social determinants of health (SDoH) impact patients' health outcomes, yet screening methods in emergency departments (ED) are not consistent or standardized. The SDoH-related health disparities may have widened during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, especially among patients who primarily receive their medical care in EDs. We sought to identify SDoH among ED urgent care patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at an urban safety-net hospital, assess the impact of the pandemic on their SDoH, study the feasibility of SDoH screening and resource referrals, and identify preferred methods of resource referrals and barriers to accessing resources. METHODS: Research assistants screened ED urgent care patients using a validated SDoH screener, inquiring about the impact of COVID-19 on their SDoH. A printed resource guide was provided. Two weeks later, a follow-up telephone survey assessed for barriers to resource connection and patients' preferred methods for resource referrals. This study was deemed exempt by our institutional review board. RESULTS: Of the 418 patients presented with a screener, 414 (99.0%) patients completed the screening. Of those screened, 296 (71.5%) reported at least one adverse SDoH, most commonly education (38.7%), food insecurity (35.3%), and employment (31.0%). Housing insecurity was reported by 21.0%. Over half of patients (57.0%) endorsed COVID-19 affecting their SDoH. During follow-up, 156 of 234 (67%) attempted calls were successful and 36/156 (23.1%) reported attempting to connect with a resource, with most attempts made for stable housing (11.0%) and food (7.7%). Reasons for not contacting the provided resources included lack of time (37.8%) and forgetting to do so (26.3%). Patients preferred resource guides to be printed (34.0%) and sent via text message to their mobile devices (25.6%). CONCLUSION: Many urgent care patients of this urban ED reported at least one adverse SDoH, the majority of which were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding further emphasizes the need to allocate more resources to standardize and expand SDoH screening in EDs. Additionally, hospitals should increase availability of printed or electronic SDoH resource guides, resource navigators, and interpreters both during and after ED visits.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Determinants of Health , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Ambulatory Care , Emergency Service, HospitalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Boston Medical Center (BMC), a safety-net hospital, treated a substantial portion of the Boston cohort that was sick with COVID-19. Unfortunately, these patients experienced high rates of morbidity and mortality given the significant health disparities that many of BMC's patients face. Boston Medical Center launched a palliative care extender program to help address the needs of critically ill ED patients under crisis conditions. In this program evaluation our goal was to assess outcomes between those who received palliative care in the emergency department (ED) vs those who received palliative care as an inpatient or were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We used a matched retrospective cohort study design to assess the difference in outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients received palliative care services in the ED, and 317 patients received palliative care services as an inpatient. After controlling for demographics, patients who received palliative care services in the ED were less likely to have a change in level of care (P<0.001) or be admitted to an ICU (P<0.001). Cases had an average length of stay of 5.2 days compared to controls who stayed 9.9 days (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Within a busy ED environment, initiating palliative care discussions by ED staff can be challenging. This study demonstrates that consulting palliative care specialists early in the course of the patient's ED stay can benefit patients and families and improve resource utilization.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Palliative Care , Humans , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Intensive Care Units , Hospitals , Inpatients , Hospital Mortality , Length of StayABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To address gender inequality, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) created a steering committee that recommended the collection of baseline and ongoing metrics of pharmacy leadership. The purpose of this study was to quantify gender inequality in distributions of residency program director (RPD) and director of pharmacy (DOP) positions and to investigate gender distributions among recipients of ASHP professional leadership awards. METHODS: RPD and DOP information for postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) programs included in the online ASHP residency directory were collected in December of 2020. Publicly available records were used to collect information on recipients of the Harvey A.K. Whitney Award and John W. Webb Award during the periods 1950-2020 and 1985-2020, respectively. Gender information for RPDs, DOPs, and award recipients was collected from listed pronouns available in public records. A χâ2 test was used for analysis of the collected data. RESULTS: A total of 1,176 PGY1 residency programs were included. Of the RPD positions assessed, 66% (n = 775) were filled by women pharmacists (P < 0.0001), while the percentage of DOP leadership positions held by women was 42% (n = 496) (P < 0.0001). Evaluation of data on recipients of the Harvey A.K. Whitney Award and John W. Webb Award revealed the occurrence of female recipients is 19.7% (n = 14) and 16.7% (n = 6), respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: RPD positions have a higher prevalence of being filled by women. DOP positions remain male-dominated and revealed gender inequality among senior-level leadership roles. Pharmacy leadership award analysis identified further gender inequality. The results from the study serve as a baseline of current gender metrics for pharmacy leaderships in hospital systems with PGY1 residency programs.