Fewer emergency department alarms is associated with reduced use of medications for acute agitation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient monitoring systems provide critical information but often produce loud, frequent alarms that worsen patient agitation and stress. This may increase the use of physical and chemical restraints with implications for patient morbidity and autonomy. This study analyzes how augmenting alarm thresholds affects the proportion of alarm-free time and the frequency of medications administered to treat acute agitation. METHODS: Our emergency department's patient monitoring system was modified on June 28, 2022 to increase the tachycardia alarm threshold from 130 to 150 and to remove alarm sounds for several arrhythmias, including bigeminy and premature ventricular beats. A pre-post study was performed lasting 55 days before and 55 days after this intervention. The primary outcome was change in number of daily patient alarms. The secondary outcomes were alarm-free time per day and median number of antipsychotic and benzodiazepine medications administered per day. The safety outcome was the median number of patients transferred daily to the resuscitation area. We used quantile regression to compare outcomes between the pre- and post-intervention period and linear regression to correlate alarm-free time with the number of sedating medications administered. RESULTS: Between the pre- and post-intervention period, the median number of alarms per day decreased from 1332 to 845 (-37%). This was primarily driven by reduced low-priority arrhythmia alarms from 262 to 21 (-92%), while the median daily census was unchanged (33 vs 32). Median hours per day free from alarms increased from 1.0 to 2.4 (difference 1.4, 95% CI 0.8-2.1). The median number of sedating medications administered per day decreased from 14 to 10 (difference - 4, 95% CI -1 to -7) while the number of escalations in level of care to our resuscitation care area did not change significantly. Multivariable linear regression showed a 60-min increase of alarm-free time per day was associated with 0.8 (95% CI 0.1-1.4) fewer administrations of sedating medication while an additional patient on the behavioral health census was associated with 0.5 (95% CI 0.0-1.1) more administrations of sedating medication. CONCLUSION: A reasonable change in alarm parameter settings may increase the time patients and healthcare workers spend in the emergency department without alarm noise, which in this study was associated with fewer doses of sedating medications administered.

Effect of Automated Real-Time Feedback on Early-Sepsis Care: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a real-time monitoring system with automated clinician alerts improves 3-hour sepsis bundle adherence. DESIGN: Prospective, pragmatic clinical trial. Allocation alternated every 7 days. SETTING: Quaternary hospital from December 1, 2020 to November 30, 2021. PATIENTS: Adult emergency department or inpatients meeting objective sepsis criteria triggered an electronic medical record (EMR)-embedded best practice advisory. Enrollment occurred when clinicians acknowledged the advisory indicating they felt sepsis was likely. INTERVENTION: Real-time automated EMR monitoring identified suspected sepsis patients with incomplete bundle measures within 1-hour of completion deadlines and generated reminder pages. Clinicians responsible for intervention group patients received reminder pages; no pages were sent for controls. The primary analysis cohort was the subset of enrolled patients at risk of bundle nonadherent care that had reminder pages generated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was orders for all 3-hour bundle elements within guideline time limits. Secondary outcomes included guideline-adherent delivery of all 3-hour bundle elements, 28-day mortality, antibiotic discontinuation within 48-hours, and pathogen recovery from any culture within 7 days of time-zero. Among 3,269 enrolled patients, 1,377 had reminder pages generated and were included in the primary analysis. There were 670 (48.7%) at-risk patients randomized to paging alerts and 707 (51.3%) to control. Bundle-adherent orders were placed for 198 intervention patients (29.6%) versus 149 (21.1%) controls (difference: 8.5%; 95% CI, 3.9-13.1%; p = 0.0003). Bundle-adherent care was delivered for 152 (22.7%) intervention versus 121 (17.1%) control patients (difference: 5.6%; 95% CI, 1.4-9.8%; p = 0.0095). Mortality was similar between groups (8.4% vs 8.3%), as were early antibiotic discontinuation (35.1% vs 33.4%) and pan-culture negativity (69.0% vs 68.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Real-time monitoring and paging alerts significantly increased orders for and delivery of guideline-adherent care for suspected sepsis patients at risk of 3-hour bundle nonadherence. The trial was underpowered to determine whether adherence affected mortality. Despite enrolling patients with clinically suspected sepsis, early antibiotic discontinuation and pan-culture negativity were common, highlighting challenges in identifying appropriate patients for sepsis bundle application.

Patient Experience With an In-Home COVID Virtual Observation Unit: An Analysis.

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a novel, home-based COVID Virtual Observation Unit (CVOU) from an urban, university-affiliated emergency department with ∼112,000 annual visits. Telephone-based survey questions were administered by nursing staff working with the program. Of 402 patients enrolled in the CVOU, 221 (55%) were able to be contacted during the study period; 180 (45%) agreed to participate in the telephone interview. Overall, 95% (169 out of 177) of the surveyed patients reported 8 to 10 on the likelihood to recommend CVOU and 82% (100 out of 122) rated the quality of care as 10 out of 10. Over 90% of respondents reported that all role groups (nurses, paramedics, and physicians) treated them with courtesy and respect, explained things in an understandable way, and listened to them carefully. Over 80% of respondents reported that the program kept them at home. In summary, patient experiences with this novel home-based care program were highly positive. These data help underscore the importance of patient-centeredness in home-based care, and further support the concept of these innovative care models.

CT utilization in evaluation of skin and soft tissue extremity infections in the ED: Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) are commonly diagnosed in the emergency department (ED). While most SSTI are diagnosed with patient history and physical exam alone, ED clinicians may order CT imaging when they suspect more serious or complicated infections. Patients who inject drugs are thought to be at higher risk for complications from SSTI and may undergo CT imaging more frequently. The objective of this study is to characterize CT utilization when evaluating for SSTI in ED patients particularly in patients with intravenous drug use (IVDU), the frequency of significant and actionable findings from CT imaging, and its impact on subsequent management and ED operations. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of encounters involving a diagnosis of SSTI in seven EDs across an integrated health system between October 2019 and October 2021. Descriptive statistics were used to assess overall trends, compare CT utilization frequencies, actionable imaging findings, and surgical intervention between patients who inject drugs and those who do not. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze patient factors associated with higher likelihood of CT imaging. RESULTS: There were 4833 ED encounters with an ICD-10 diagnosis of SSTI during the study period, of which 6% involved a documented history of IVDU and 30% resulted in admission. 7% (315/4833) of patients received CT imaging, and 22% (70/315) of CTs demonstrated evidence of possible deep space or necrotizing infections. Patients with history of IVDU were more likely than patients without IVDU to receive a CT scan (18% vs 6%), have a CT scan with findings suspicious for deep-space or necrotizing infection (4% vs 1%), and undergo surgical drainage in the operating room within 48 h of arrival (5% vs 2%). Male sex, abnormal vital signs, and history of IVDU were each associated with higher likelihood of CT utilization. Encounters involving CT scans had longer median times to ED disposition than those without CT scans, regardless of whether these encounters resulted in admission (9.0 vs 5.5 h), ED observation (5.5 vs 4.1 h), or discharge (6.8 vs 2.9 h). DISCUSSION: ED clinicians ordered CT scans in 7% of encounters when evaluating for SSTI, most frequently in patients with abnormal vital signs or a history of IV drug use. Patients with a history of IVDU had higher rates of CT findings suspicious for deep space infections or necrotizing infections and higher rates of incision and drainage procedures in the OR. While CT scans significantly extended time spent in the ED for patients, this appeared justified by the high rate of actionable findings found on imaging, particularly for patients with a history of IVDU.

Impact of Emergency Department Crowding on Discharged Patient Experience.

INTRODUCTION: While emergency department (ED) crowding has deleterious effects on patient care outcomes and operational efficiency, impacts on the experience for patients discharged from the ED are unknown. We aimed to study how patient-reported experience is affected by ED crowding to characterize which factors most impact discharged patient experience. METHODS: This institutional review board-exempt, retrospective, cohort study included all discharged adult ED patients July 1, 2020-June 30, 2021 with at least some response data to the the National Research Corporation Health survey, sent to most patients discharged from our large, academic medical center ED. Our query yielded 9,401 unique encounters for 9,221 patients. Based on responses to the summary question of whether the patient was likely to recommend our ED, patients were categorized as "detractors" (scores 0-6) or "non-detractors" (scores 7-10). We assessed the relationship between census and patient experience by 1) computing percentage of detractors within each care area and assessing for differences in census and boarder burden between detractors and non-detractors, and 2) multivariable logistic regression assessing the relationship between likelihood of being a detractor in terms of the ED census and the patient's last ED care area. A second logistic regression controlled for additional patient- and encounter-specific covariates. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 24.8%. Overall, 13.9% of responders were detractors. There was a significant difference in the average overall ED census for detractors (average 3.70 more patients physically present at the time of arrival, 95% CI 2.33-5.07). In unadjusted multivariable analyses, three lower acuity ED care areas showed statistically significant differences of detractor likelihood with changes in patient census. The overall area under the curve (AUC) for the unadjusted model was 0.594 (CI 0.577-0.610). The adjusted model had higher AUC (0.673, CI 0.657-.690]; P<0.001), with the same three care areas having significant differences in detractor likelihood based on patient census changes. Length of stay (OR 1.71, CI 1.50-1.95), leaving against medical advice/without being seen (OR 5.15, CI 3.84-6.89), and the number of ED care areas a patient visited (OR 1.16, CI 1.01-1.33) was associated with an increase in detractor likelihood. CONCLUSION: Patients arriving to a crowded ED and ultimately discharged are more likely to have negative patient experience. Future studies should characterize which variables most impact patient experience of discharged ED patients.

Design and Implementation of a Real-time Monitoring Platform for Optimal Sepsis Care in an Emergency Department: Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is the leading cause of death in US hospitals. Compliance with bundled care, specifically serial lactates, blood cultures, and antibiotics, improves outcomes but is often delayed or missed altogether in a busy practice environment. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to design, implement, and validate a novel monitoring and alerting platform that provides real-time feedback to frontline emergency department (ED) providers regarding adherence to bundled care. METHODS: This single-center, prospective, observational study was conducted in three phases: the design and technical development phase to build an initial version of the platform; the pilot phase to test and refine the platform in the clinical setting; and the postpilot rollout phase to fully implement the study intervention. RESULTS: During the design and technical development, study team members and stakeholders identified the criteria for patient inclusion, selected bundle measures from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Sepsis Core Measure for alerting, and defined alert thresholds, message content, delivery mechanisms, and recipients. Additional refinements were made based on 70 provider survey results during the pilot phase, including removing alerts for vasopressor initiation and modifying text in the pages to facilitate patient identification. During the 48 days of the postpilot rollout phase, 15,770 ED encounters were tracked and 711 patient encounters were included in the active monitoring cohort. In total, 634 pages were sent at a rate of 0.98 per attending physician shift. Overall, 38.3% (272/711) patients had at least one page. The missing bundle elements that triggered alerts included: antibiotics 41.6% (136/327), repeat lactate 32.4% (106/327), blood cultures 20.8% (68/327), and initial lactate 5.2% (17/327). Of the missing Sepsis Core Measures elements for which a page was sent, 38.2% (125/327) were successfully completed on time. CONCLUSIONS: A real-time sepsis care monitoring and alerting platform was created for the ED environment. The high proportion of patients with at least one alert suggested the significant potential for such a platform to improve care, whereas the overall number of alerts per clinician suggested a low risk of alarm fatigue. The study intervention warrants a more rigorous evaluation to ensure that the added alerts lead to better outcomes for patients with sepsis.

Utilization of a multidisciplinary emergency department sepsis huddle to reduce time to antibiotics and improve SEP-1 compliance.

Sepsis is a significant public health crisis in the United States, contributing to 50% of inpatient hospital deaths. Given its dramatic health effects and implications in the setting of new CMS care guidelines, ED leaders have renewed focus on appropriate and timely sepsis care, including timely administration of antibiotics in patients at risk for sepsis. Modeling the success of multidisciplinary bedside huddles in improving compliance with appropriate care in other healthcare settings, a Sepsis Huddle was implemented in a large, academic ED, with the goal of driving compliance with standardized sepsis care as described in the CMS SEP-1 measure. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed, with the primary finding that utilization of the Sepsis Huddle resulted in antibiotics being administered on average 41 min sooner than when the Sepsis Huddle was not performed. Given that literature suggests that early administration of appropriate antibiotic therapy is a major driver of mortality reduction in patients with sepsis, this study represents a proof of concept that utilization of a Sepsis Huddle may serve to improve outcomes among ED patients at risk for sepsis.

Optimizing Patient Experience in the Emergency Department.

Emergency department (ED) patient experience is a growing area of focus for leaders in the ED and throughout health care. While many factors intrinsic to the ED care environment add to the challenge of providing patients with an excellent experience, doing so holds many benefits, including improved patient compliance and health outcomes, improved workplace satisfaction and reduced provider and staff burnout, decreased malpractice risk, and increased revenue. Although wait time is a major driver of patient experience, provider and staff communication are critically important and excellent communication and perceived empathy may mitigate long waits, overcrowded environments, and other challenges.

Humanism in the Age of COVID-19: Renewing Focus on Communication and Compassion.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the largest clinical and operational challenges faced by emergency medicine, and our EDs continue to see increased volumes of infected patients, many of whom are not only ill, but acutely aware and fearful of their circumstances and potential mortality. Given this, there may be no more important time to focus on staff-patient communication and expression of compassion. However, many of the techniques usually employed by emergency clinicians to provide comfort to patients and their families are made more challenging or impossible by the current circumstances. Geriatric ED patients, who are at increased risk of severe disease, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of isolation. Despite many challenges, emergency clinicians have at their disposal a myriad of tools that can still be used to express compassion and empathy to their patients. Placing emphasis on using these techniques to maximize humanism in the care of COVID-19 patients during this crisis has the potential to bring improvements to ED patient care well after this pandemic has passed.

Patient Experiences With Transfer for Community Hospital Inpatient Admission From an Academic Emergency Department.

Emergency department (ED) crowding continues to be a major challenge and has important ramifications for patient care quality. One strategy to decrease ED crowding has been to implement alternative pathways to traditional hospital admission. Through a survey-based retrospective cohort study, we aimed to assess the patient experience for those who agreed to transfer and admission to an affiliated community hospital from a large, academic center's ED. In all, 85% of participants rated their overall experience as either great or good, 92% did not find it hard to make the decision to be transferred, and 95% found the transfer process itself to be easy.

Using Design Thinking to Improve Patient-Provider Communication in the Emergency Department.

QUALITY ISSUE: Emergency department overcrowding has been identified as a quality and patient safety concern. INITIAL ASSESSMENT: The need for a project focused on mitigating risk in the setting of overcrowding was identified. CHOICE OF SOLUTION: Design thinking is an improvement methodology that uses a process that prioritizes empathy for end users and is optimal for abstract problems. IMPLEMENTATION: The team leveraged design thinking to walk through a 5-step process. In the empathize phase, inputs were collected and safety themes identified. In the define phase, optimal communication was identified as the focus area of the project. During the ideate phase, the team looked both internally and externally to identify tactics that existed to improve communication. Next, the team prototyped different solutions. In the testing phase, 33 trainings with 289 clinicians were conducted. EVALUATION: The evaluation of this program demonstrated that it was positively received by clinicians. Although only 72% of clinicians believed the course would be a valuable use of their time before taking it, 97% reported it was a valuable use of their time following completion (P < .001). Precourse self-evaluation of knowledge, skill, and ability was high. Despite this, postcourse self-efficacy improved significantly in all 4 domains studied. LESSONS LEARNED: Design thinking offers an agile method for process improvement that was ideal for our relatively abstract problem. Although likely not an optimal method for a problem that is well understood, design thinking holds promise for many of the increasingly patient-centered initiatives that are underway in health care.

Calling on the Patient's Perspective in Emergency Medicine: Analysis of 1 Year of a Patient Callback Program.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered approaches in the evaluation of patient experience are increasingly important priorities for quality improvement in health-care delivery. Our objective was to investigate common themes in patient-reported data to better understand areas for improvement in the emergency department (ED) experience. METHODS: A large urban, tertiary-care ED conducted phone interviews with 2607 patients who visited the ED during 2015. Patients were asked to identify one area that would have significantly improved their visit. Transcripts were analyzed using content analysis, and the results were summarized with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The most commonly cited themes for improvement in the patient experience were wait time (49.4%) and communication (14.6%). Related, but more nuanced, themes emerged around the perception of ED crowding and compassionate care as additional important contributors to the patient experience. Other frequently cited factors contributing to a negative experience were the discharge process and inability to complete follow-up plan (8.0%), environmental factors (7.9%), perceived competency of providers in the evaluation or treatment (7.4%), and pain management (7.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Wait times and perceptions of ED crowding, as well as provider communication and compassionate care, are significant factors identified by patients that affect their ED experience.

A Conceptual Model for Emergency Department Patient Experience.

Emergency department (ED) patient experience continues to be a growing area of focus for ED physicians, administrators, and regulatory agencies. Recent literature has suggested a strong correlation between positive ratings of patient experience and important health system goals, including improved clinical outcomes and care quality, increased staff satisfaction, and reduced medicolegal risk. However, given the myriad of factors driving ED patient experience, identifying effective and synergistic interventions can present a challenge, especially in the setting of limited ED resources. Utilizing the themes identified in a recent systematic review of the ED patient experience literature, we developed a conceptual "logic model" of ED patient experience in order to provide a broadly applicable framework for practical intervention and to guide further study of ED patient experience interventions. The logic model was modified in an iterative fashion through review by local patient and staff groups as well as a national interest group until arriving at the current, comprehensive version. Here, we describe the creation of the logic model and, with the aim of providing a framework for readers to develop similar models for their practice settings, provide a case discussion of its use by an ED medical director.

Emergency Department Patient Experience: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Patient experience with emergency department (ED) care is an expanding area of focus, and recent literature has demonstrated strong correlation between patient experience and meeting several ED and hospital goals. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of existing literature to identify specific factors most commonly identified as influencing ED patient experience. METHODS: A literature search was performed, and articles were included if published in peer-reviewed journals, primarily focused on ED patient experience, employed observational or interventional methodology, and were available in English. After a structured screening process, 107 publications were included for data extraction. RESULT: Of the 107 included publications, 51 were published before 2011, 57% were conducted by American investigators, and 12% were published in nursing journals. The most commonly identified themes included staff-patient communication, ED wait times, and staff empathy and compassion. CONCLUSION: The most commonly identified drivers of ED patient experience include communication, wait times, and staff empathy; however, existing literature is limited. Additional investigation is necessary to further characterize ED patient experience themes and identify interventions that effectively improve these domains.

Overall Emergency Department Rating: Identifying the Factors That Matter Most to Patient Experience.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience is becoming an area of interest in Emergency Medicine as more is understood about its impact on outcomes and the expectation that it will soon be tied to reimbursement. No study has investigated the predictors of emergency department (ED) patient satisfaction in over a decade. As the care environment, access to information, and consumer interests change, determinants of satisfaction have likely evolved. Our objective was to examine the factors that were most predictive of ED satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study at an urban, university-affiliated ED. The relationship between overall satisfaction and patients' responses to individual questions was assessed using a chi-square test and a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: During the study period, 7,872 patients participated in a telephone interview. Logistic regression found 13 questions predictive of high overall ED rating and 9 questions predictive of low overall ED rating. Six questions appeared in both analyses, related to timeliness, cleanliness, the physician's ability to listen carefully, teamwork, and the perception of being helped by the care. CONCLUSIONS: There are strong predictors of overall ED satisfaction related to communication, wait time, environment, and perception that care was helpful. Further efforts should focus on identifying interventions in each of these domains.