We all make choices: A decision analysis framework for disposition decision in the ED.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) providers' disposition decision impacts patient care and safety. The objective of this brief report is to gain a better understanding of ED providers' disposition decision and risk tolerance of associated outcomes. METHODS: We synthesized qualitative and quantitative methods including decision mapping, survey research, statistical analysis, and word clouds. Between July 2017 and August 2017, a 10-item survey was developed and conducted at the study hospital. Descriptive and statistical analyses were used to assess the relationship between the participant characteristics (age, gender, years of experience in the ED, and level of expertise) and risk tolerance of outcomes (72-h return and negative outcome) associated with disposition decision. Word clouds facilitated prioritization of qualitative responses regarding information impacting and supporting the disposition decision. RESULTS: Total of 46 participants completed the survey. The mean age was 39.5 (standard deviation (SD) 10years), and mean years of experience was 9.6years (SD 8.7years). Decision map highlighted the connections between patient-, provider-, and system-related factors. Survey results showed that negative outcome resulted in less risk tolerance compared to 72-h return. Chi-square tests did not provide sufficient evidence to indicate that the responses are independent of participants characteristics - except age and the risk of 72-h return (p=0.046). CONCLUSION: Discharge decision making in the ED is complex as it involves interconnected patient, provider, and system factors. Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative methods promise enhanced understanding of how providers arrive to disposition decision, as well as safety and quality of care in the ED.

The Effect of Noise Distraction on Emergency Medicine Resident Performance During Intubation of a Patient Simulator.

BACKGROUND: The environment in the Emergency Department (ED) is chaotic, and physicians are expected to perform procedures amongst distractions. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to prospectively determine the effects of various levels of noise distraction on the success and time to successful intubation of a simulator. METHODS: Forty-five Emergency Medicine, Emergency Medicine/Internal Medicine, and Emergency Medicine/Family Medicine Residents were studied in background noise environments of <50 decibels (noise level 1), 60-70 decibels (noise level 2), and of >70 decibels (noise level 3). Residents attempted three intubations on a simulator in succession, with three randomized noise levels. Time, in seconds, to intubation was measured in each of the successful intubations. Generalized linear models were employed to examine associations between noise level and time to intubation by attempt. RESULTS: Time to intubation decreased with each attempt (median = 25.9, 17.9, 14.4 for attempt numbers 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Decibel noise level was not associated with time to intubation (p > 0.6) or success rate (p > 0.1). Attempt number did not modify the association between noise and time to intubation (p-for-interaction = 0.16). CONCLUSION: Noise level did not have an effect on time to intubation or intubation success rate, suggesting that noise levels in the ED do not affect provider ability to perform procedures. However, knowing that increased noise levels increase stress and impair the ability to communicate with team members, further study needs to be done to definitively conclude that noise does not affect provider performance in the ED setting.