A Longitudinal Survey on Canadian Emergency Physician Burnout.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Since Canada eased pandemic restrictions, emergency departments have experienced record levels of patient attendance, wait times, bed blocking, and crowding. The aim of this study was to report Canadian emergency physician burnout rates compared with the same physicians in 2020 and to describe how emergency medicine work has affected emergency physician well-being. METHODS: This longitudinal study on Canadian emergency physician wellness enrolled participants in April 2020. In September 2022, participants were invited to a follow-up survey consisting of the Maslach Burnout Inventory and an optional free-text explanation of their experience. The primary outcomes were emotional exhaustion and depersonalization levels, which were compared with the Maslach Burnout Inventory survey conducted at the end of 2020. A thematic analysis identified common stressors, challenges, emotions, and responses among participants. RESULTS: The response rate to the 2022 survey was 381 (62%) of 615 between September 28 and October 28, 2022, representing all provinces or territories in Canada (except Yukon). The median participant age was 42 years. In total, 49% were men, and 93% were staff physicians with a median of 12 years of work experience. 59% of respondents reported high emotional exhaustion, and 64% reported high depersonalization. Burnout levels in 2022 were significantly higher compared with 2020. Prevalent themes included a broken health care system, a lack of societal support, and systemic workplace challenges leading to physician distress and loss of physicians from the emergency workforce. CONCLUSION: We found very high burnout levels in emergency physician respondents that have increased since 2020.

Transitions of care for older adults discharged home from the emergency department: an inductive thematic content analysis of patient comments.

OBJECTIVE: Improving care transitions for older adults can reduce emergency department (ED) visits, adverse events, and empower community autonomy. We conducted an inductive qualitative content analysis to identify themes emerging from comments to better understand ED care transitions. METHODS: The LEARNING WISDOM prospective longitudinal observational cohort includes older adults (≥ 65 years) who experienced a care transition after an ED visit from both before and during COVID-19. Their comments on this transition were collected via phone interview and transcribed. We conducted an inductive qualitative content analysis with randomly selected comments until saturation. Themes that arose from comments were coded and organized into frequencies and proportions. We followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). RESULTS: Comments from 690 patients (339 pre-COVID, 351 during COVID) composed of 351 women (50.9%) and 339 men (49.1%) were analyzed. Patients were satisfied with acute emergency care, and the proportion of patients with positive acute care experiences increased with the COVID-19 pandemic. Negative patient comments were most often related to communication between health providers across the care continuum and the professionalism of personnel in the ED. Comments concerning home care became more neutral with the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: Patients were satisfied overall with acute care but reported gaps in professionalism and follow-up communication between providers. Comments may have changed in tone from positive to neutral regarding home care over the COVID-19 pandemic due to service slowdowns. Addressing these concerns may improve the quality of care transitions and provide future pandemic mitigation strategies.

Implementing Electronic Discharge Communication Tools in Pediatric Emergency Departments: Multicountry, Cross-Sectional Readiness Survey of Nurses and Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency departments (ED) in many countries are implementing electronic tools such as kiosks, mobile apps, and electronic patient portals, to improve the effectiveness of discharge communication. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to survey nurse and physician readiness to adopt these tools. METHODS: An electronic, cross-sectional survey was distributed to a convenience sample of currently practicing ED nurses and physicians affiliated with national pediatric research organizations in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Survey development was informed by the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, sustainability framework. Measures of central tendency, and parametric and nonparametric tests were used to describe and compare nurse and physician responses. RESULTS: Out of the 270 participants, the majority were physicians (61%, 164/270), female (65%, 176/270), and had 5 or more years of ED experience (76%, 205/270). There were high levels of consensus related to the value proposition of electronic discharge communication tools (EDCTs) with 82% (221/270) of them agreeing that they help parents and patients with comprehension and recall. Lower levels of consensus were observed for organizational factors with only 37% (100/270) agreeing that their staff is equipped to handle challenges with communication technologies. Nurses and physicians showed significant differences on 3 out of 21 readiness factors. Compared to physicians, nurses were significantly more likely to report that EDs have a responsibility to integrate EDCTs as part of a modern system (P<.001) and that policies are in place to guide safe and secure electronic communication (P=.02). Physicians were more likely to agree that using an EDCT would change their routine tasks (P=.04). One third (33%, 89/270) of participants indicated that they use or have used EDCT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low levels of uptake, both nurses and physicians in multiple countries view EDCTs as a valuable support to families visiting pediatric ED. Leadership for technology change, unclear impact on workflow, and disparities in digital literacy skills require focused research effort.

Prevalence and predictors of elder abuse among older adults attending emergency departments: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Elder abuse is associated with impaired physical and psychological health. It is, however, rarely identified in emergency departments (EDs). The objective was to determine the prevalence and the predictors of elder abuse among older adults visiting EDs. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted in eight Canadian EDs between May and August 2021. Patients were eligible if they were ≥ 65 years old, oriented to time, and with a Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale score 3, 4 or 5. In a private setting, participants were questioned directly about abuse as part of a larger questionnaire exploring ten non-medical problems. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of elder abuse. RESULTS: A total of 1061 participants were recruited (mean age: 77.1 (SD 7.6) years, female sex: 55.7%, lived alone: 42.5%). Patients mostly attended EDs for pain (19.6%), neurologic (11.3%) or cardiovascular (8.4%) symptoms. The most frequent pre-existing comorbidities were hypertension (67.2%), mental health conditions (33.3%) and cardiac insufficiency (29.6%). Mobility issues outside (41.0%) or inside their home (30.7%) and loneliness (29.4%) were also frequent. Fifty-four (5.1%) participants reported elder abuse, of which 34.3% were aware of available community-based resources. Identified predictors of elder abuse were female sex (OR 2.8 [95%CI 1.4; 5.6]), financial difficulties (OR 3.6 [95%CI 1.8; 7.3]), food insecurity (OR 2.7 [95%CI 1.2; 5.6]), need for a caregiver (OR 2.7 [95%CI 1.5; 5.0]) and at least one pre-existing mental health condition (OR 2.6 [95%CI 1.4; 4.9]). CONCLUSION: When questioned directly, 5.1% of older adults attending EDs reported experiencing abuse. Female sex, functional impairment, social vulnerability, and mental health comorbidities are associated with elder abuse. Given its importance and relatively high prevalence, ED professionals should have a low threshold to ask directly about elder abuse.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: La maltraitance des personnes âgées est associée à une détérioration de la santé physique et psychologique. Elle est cependant rarement identifiée dans les services d'urgence. L'objectif était de déterminer la prévalence et les prédicteurs de l'abus envers les aînés chez les personnes âgées qui consultent dans un service d'urgence. MéTHODES: Cette étude de cohorte prospective a été menée dans huit services d'urgence canadiens entre mai et août 2021. Les patients étaient éligibles s'ils étaient âgés de ≥ 65 ans, s'ils étaient orientés vers le temps et s'ils avaient un score de 3, 4 ou 5 sur l'échelle canadienne de triage et d'acuité. Dans un cadre privé, les participants ont été interrogés directement sur la maltraitance dans le cadre d'un questionnaire plus large explorant 10 problèmes non médicaux. Nous avons utilisé une régression logistique multivariable pour identifier les facteurs prédictifs de la maltraitance envers les personnes âgées. RéSULTATS: Au total, 1 061 participants ont été recrutés (âge moyen : 77,1 (SD 7,6) ans, sexe féminin : 55,7 %, vivant seul : 42,5 %). Les patients se sont surtout rendus aux urgences pour des douleurs (19,6 %), des symptômes neurologiques (11,3 %) ou cardiovasculaires (8,4 %). Les comorbidités préexistantes les plus fréquentes étaient l'hypertension (67,2 %), les problèmes de santé mentale (33,3 %) et l'insuffisance cardiaque (29,6 %). Les problèmes de mobilité à l'extérieur (41,0 %) ou à l'intérieur du domicile (30,7 %) et la solitude (29,4 %) sont également fréquents. Cinquante-quatre (5,1 %) participants ont signalé des cas de maltraitance des personnes âgées, dont 34,3 % connaissaient les ressources communautaires disponibles. Les facteurs prédictifs identifiés de maltraitance envers les personnes âgées étaient le sexe féminin (RC 2,8 [IC 95 % 1,4 ; 5,6]), les difficultés financières (RC 3,6 [IC 95 % 1,8 ; 7,3]), l'insécurité alimentaire (RC 2,7 [IC 95 % 1,2 ; 5,6]), besoin d'un aidant (RC 2,7 [IC 95 % 1,5 ; 5,0]) et au moins un problème de santé mentale préexistant (RC 2,6 [IC 95 % 1,4 ; 4,9]). CONCLUSION: Interrogées directement, 5,1 % des personnes âgées fréquentant les urgences ont déclaré avoir été victimes de maltraitance. Le sexe féminin, les déficits fonctionnels, la vulnérabilité sociale et les problématiques de santé mentale sont associés à la maltraitance des personnes âgées. Compte tenu de son importance et de sa prévalence relativement élevée, les professionnels des urgences ne devraient pas hésiter à poser directement des questions sur la maltraitance aux personnes âgées.

Accuracy of Self-Reported COVID-19 Vaccination Status Compared With a Public Health Vaccination Registry in Québec: Observational Diagnostic Study.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of self-reported vaccination status is important to guide real-world vaccine effectiveness studies and policy making in jurisdictions where access to electronic vaccine registries is restricted. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of self-reported vaccination status and reliability of the self-reported number of doses, brand, and time of vaccine administration. METHODS: This diagnostic accuracy study was completed by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network. We enrolled consecutive patients presenting to 4 emergency departments (EDs) in Québec between March 24, 2020, and December 25, 2021. We included adult patients who were able to consent, could speak English or French, and had a proven COVID-19 infection. We compared the self-reported vaccination status of the patients with their vaccination status in the electronic Québec Vaccination Registry. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status (index test) ascertained during telephone follow-up compared with the Québec Vaccination Registry (reference standard). The accuracy was calculated by dividing all correctly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants by the sum of all correctly and incorrectly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. We also reported interrater agreement with the reference standard as measured by unweighted Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at telephone follow-up and at the time of their index ED visit, number of vaccine doses, and brand. RESULTS: During the study period, we included 1361 participants. At the time of the follow-up interview, 932 participants reported at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status was 96% (95% CI 95%-97%). Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at phone follow-up was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89-0.93) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) at the time of their index ED visit. Cohen κ was 0.89 (95% CI 0.87-0.91) for the number of doses, 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.84) for the brand of the first dose, 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.83) for the brand of the second dose, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.34-0.83) for the brand of the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: We reported a high accuracy of self-reported vaccination status for adult patients without cognitive disorders who can express themselves in English or French. Researchers can use self-reported COVID-19 vaccination data on the number of doses received, vaccine brand name, and timing of vaccination to guide future research with patients who are capable of self-reporting their vaccination data. However, access to official electronic vaccine registries is still needed to determine the vaccination status in certain susceptible populations where self-reported vaccination data remain missing or impossible to obtain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04702945; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04702945.

Psychophysiological models of hypovigilance detection: A scoping review.

Hypovigilance represents a major contributor to accidents. In operational contexts, the burden of monitoring/managing vigilance often rests on operators. Recent advances in sensing technologies allow for the development of psychophysiology-based (hypo)vigilance prediction models. Still, these models remain scarcely applied to operational situations and need better understanding. The current scoping review provides a state of knowledge regarding psychophysiological models of hypovigilance detection. Records evaluating vigilance measuring tools with gold standard comparisons and hypovigilance prediction performances were extracted from MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and Inspec. Exclusion criteria comprised aspects related to language, non-empirical papers, and sleep studies. The Quality Assessment tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) and the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) were used for bias evaluation. Twenty-one records were reviewed. They were mainly characterized by participant selection and analysis biases. Papers predominantly focused on driving and employed several common psychophysiological techniques. Yet, prediction methods and gold standards varied widely. Overall, we outline the main strategies used to assess hypovigilance, their principal limitations, and we discuss applications of these models.

Research recruitment and consent methods in a pandemic: a qualitative study of COVID-19 patients' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Virtual data collection methods and consent procedures adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic enabled continued research activities, but also introduced concerns about equity, inclusivity, representation, and privacy. Recent studies have explored these issues from institutional and researcher perspectives, but there is a need to explore patient perspectives and preferences. This study aims to explore COVID-19 patients' perspectives about research recruitment and consent for research studies about COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory qualitative focus group and interview study among British Columbian adults who self-identified as having had COVID-19. We recruited participants through personal contacts, social media, and REACH BC, an online platform that connects researchers and patients in British Columbia. We analyzed transcripts inductively and developed thematic summaries of each coding element. RESULTS: Of the 22 individuals recruited, 16 attended a focus group or interview. We found that autonomy and the feasibility of participation, attitudes toward research about COVID-19, and privacy concerns are key factors that influence participants' willingness to participate in research. We also found that participants preferred remote and virtual approaches for contact, consent, and delivery of research on COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who had COVID-19 are motivated to participate in research studies and value autonomy in their decision to participate, but researchers must be sensitive and considerate toward patient preferences and concerns, particularly as researchers adopt virtual recruitment and data collection methods. Such awareness may increase research participation and engagement.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many research groups started conducting research activities virtually. In this study, we invited individuals who had COVID-19 to share their views about how researchers recruit patients and get their consent to participate in studies about COVID-19. Through interviews and focus groups, we found that British Columbians who had COVID-19 are motivated to participate in COVID-related studies, as long as researchers maintain usual precautions around data privacy and accommodate preferences for participation. Future studies may use these patient perspectives to make informed decisions that will increase and support patient recruitment, consent and retention in research studies.

Development of practice recommendations based on the Canadian Syncope Risk Score and identification of barriers and facilitators for implementation.

BACKGROUND: Wide variations in emergency department (ED) syncope management exist. The Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) was developed to predict the probability of 30-day serious outcomes after ED disposition. Study objectives were to evaluate the acceptability of proposed CSRS practice recommendations among providers and patients, and identify barriers and facilitators for CSRS use to guide disposition decisions. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 41 physicians involved in ED syncope and 35 ED patients with syncope. We used purposive sampling to ensure a variety of physician specialties and CSRS patient risk levels. Thematic analysis was completed by two independent coders with consensus meetings to resolve conflicts. Analysis proceeded in parallel with interviews until data saturation. RESULTS: The majority (97.6%; 40/41) of physicians agreed with discharge of low risk (CSRS ≤ 0) but opined that 'no follow up' changed to 'follow-up as needed'. Physicians indicated current practices do not align with the medium-risk recommendation to discharge patients with 15-day monitoring (CSRS = 1-3; due to lack of access to monitors and timely follow-up) and the high-risk recommendation (CSRS ≥ 4) to potentially discharge patients with 15-day monitoring. Physicians recommended brief hospitalization of high-risk patients due to patient safety concerns. Facilitators included the CSRS-based patient education and scores supporting their clinical gestalt. Patients reported receiving varying levels of information regarding syncope and post-ED care, were satisfied with care received and preferred less resource intensive options. CONCLUSION: Our recommendations based on the study results were: discharge of low-risk patients with physician follow-up as needed; discharge of medium-risk patients with 15-day cardiac monitoring and brief hospitalization of high-risk patients with 15-day cardiac monitoring if discharged. Patients preferred less resource intensive options, in line with CSRS recommended care. Implementation should leverage identified facilitators (e.g., patient education) and address the barriers (e.g., monitor access) to improve ED syncope care.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La prise en charge des syncopes par les services d'urgence varie considérablement. Le Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) a été mis au point pour prédire la probabilité d'une issue grave à 30 jours après la prise en charge par le service des urgences. Les objectifs de l'étude étaient d'évaluer l'acceptabilité des recommandations pratiques proposées par le CSRS parmi les prestataires et les patients, et d'identifier les barrières et les facilitateurs de l'utilisation du CSRS pour guider les décisions de disposition. MéTHODES: Nous avons mené des entretiens semi-structurés avec 41 médecins impliqués dans la syncope aux urgences et 35 patients souffrant de syncope aux urgences. Nous avons utilisé un échantillonnage raisonné pour assurer une variété de spécialités médicales et de niveaux de risque pour les patients du CSRS. L'analyse thématique a été réalisée par deux codeurs indépendants, avec des réunions de consensus pour résoudre les conflits. L'analyse s'est déroulée parallèlement aux entretiens jusqu'à saturation des données. RéSULTATS: La majorité (97,6 % ; 40/41) des médecins étaient d'accord avec la sortie des patients à faible risque (CSRS ≤ 0), mais ont estimé que " pas de suivi " devait être remplacée par " suivi en fonction des besoins ". Les médecins ont indiqué que leurs pratiques actuelles ne sont pas conformes à la recommandation à risque moyen de faire sortir les patients avec une surveillance de 15 jours (CSRS = 1-3 ; en raison du manque d'accès aux moniteurs et au suivi en temps opportun) et à la recommandation à risque élevé (CSRS ≥ 4) de potentiellement faire sortir les patients avec une surveillance de 15 jours. Les médecins ont recommandé une brève hospitalisation des patients à haut risque pour des raisons de sécurité. Les facilitateurs comprenaient l'éducation des patients basée sur le CSRS et les scores soutenant leur gestalt clinique. Les patients ont déclaré avoir reçu différents niveaux d'information concernant la syncope et les soins post-urgence, étaient satisfaits des soins reçus et préféraient des options moins gourmandes en ressources. CONCLUSIONS: Nos recommandations basées sur les résultats de l'étude sont les suivantes : sortie des patients à faible risque avec suivi par un médecin si nécessaire ; la sortie des patients à risque moyen avec une surveillance cardiaque de 15 jours et une brève hospitalisation des patients à risque élevé avec une surveillance cardiaque de 15 jours en cas de sortie. Les patients ont préféré des options moins gourmandes en ressources, conformément aux soins recommandés par le CSRS. La mise en œuvre devrait s'appuyer sur les facilitateurs identifiés (par exemple, l'éducation des patients) et s'attaquer aux obstacles (par exemple, le contrôle de l'accès) pour améliorer les soins aux urgences en cas de syncope.

A value-based comparison of the management of respiratory diseases in walk-in clinics and emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare some of the health outcomes and costs associated with value of care in emergency departments (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory patients presenting with an acute respiratory disease. METHODS: A health records review was conducted from April 2016 through March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ambulatory patients at least 18 years old, (ii) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or walk-in clinic within three and seven days of the index visit. Secondary outcomes were the mean cost of care and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients. The cost of care was estimated from the Ministry of Health's perspectives using time-driven activity-based costing. RESULTS: The ED group included 170 patients and the walk-in clinic group 326 patients. The return visit incidences at three and seven days were, respectively, 25.9% and 38.2% in the ED vs. 4.9% and 14.7% in the walk-in clinic (adjusted relative risk (arr) of 4.7 (95% CI 2.6-8.6) and 2.7 (1.9-3.9)). The mean cost ($Cdn) of the index visit care was 116.0 (106.3-125.7) in the ED vs. 62.5 (57.7-67.3) in the walk-in clinic (mean difference of 56.4 (45.7-67.1)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was 5.6% in the ED vs. 24.7% in the walk-in clinic (arr 0.2, 0.01-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first in a larger research program to compare the value of care between walk-in clinics and the ED. The potential advantages of walk-in clinics over EDs (lower costs, lower incidence of return visits) for ambulatory patients with respiratory diseases should be considered in healthcare planning.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Notre objectif était de comparer certains des résultats sanitaires et des coûts associés à la valeur des soins dans les services d'urgence et les cliniques sans rendez-vous pour les patients ambulatoires souffrant d'une maladie respiratoire aiguë. MéTHODES: Une revue des dossiers médicaux a été réalisée d'avril 2016 à mars 2017 dans un service d'urgence et une clinique sans rendez-vous. Les critères d'inclusion étaient les suivants : (i) patients ambulatoires âgés d'au moins 18 ans, (ii) renvoyés chez eux avec un diagnostic d'infection des voies respiratoires supérieures (IVRS), de pneumonie, d'asthme aigu ou d'exacerbation aiguë de la maladie pulmonaire obstructive chronique. Le résultat primaire était la proportion de patients retournant à un service d'urgence ou à une clinique sans rendez-vous dans les trois et sept jours suivant la visite de référence. Les résultats secondaires étaient le coût moyen des soins et l'incidence de la prescription d'antibiotiques pour les patients atteints d'IVRS. Le coût des soins a été estimé à partir des perspectives du ministère de la santé, en utilisant la méthode de calcul des coûts par activité en fonction du temps. RéSULTATS: Le groupe des urgences comprenait 170 patients et le groupe des cliniques sans rendez-vous 326 patients. Les incidences des visites de retour à trois et sept jours étaient respectivement de 25,9 % et 38,2 % dans le service des urgences contre 4,9 % et 14,7 % à la clinique sans rendez-vous (risque relatif ajusté (arr) de 4,7 (IC à 95 % 2,6 à 8,6) et 2,7 (1,9-3,9)). Le coût moyen ($CAN) de la visite de référence était de 116,0 (106,3-125,7) aux urgences contre 62,5 (57,7-67,3) dans la clinique sans rendez-vous (différence moyenne de 56,4 (45,7-67,1)). La prescription d'antibiotiques pour l'IVRS était de 5,6 % aux urgences contre 24,7 % dans la clinique sans rendez-vous (arr 0,2, 0,01-0,6). CONCLUSIONS: Cette étude est la première d'un programme de recherche plus vaste visant à comparer la valeur des soins entre les cliniques sans rendez-vous et les urgences. Les avantages potentiels des cliniques sans rendez-vous par rapport aux services d'urgence (coûts moindres, incidence plus faible des visites de retour) pour les patients ambulatoires souffrant de maladies respiratoires devraient être pris en compte dans la planification des soins de santé.

Research interrupted: applying the CONSERVE 2021 Statement to a randomized trial of rehabilitation during critical illness affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches. METHODS: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures. RESULTS: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol. CONCLUSIONS: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018.

Decision aids for home and community care: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Decision aids (DAs) for clients in home and community care can support shared decision-making (SDM) with patients, healthcare teams and informal caregivers. We aimed to identify DAs developed for home and community care, verify their adherence to international DA criteria and explore the involvement of interprofessional teams in their development and use. DESIGN: Systematic review reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Six electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library) from inception to November 2019, social media and grey literature websites up to January 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: DAs designed for home and community care settings or including home care or community services as options. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently reviewed citations. Analysis consisted of a narrative synthesis of outcomes and a thematic analysis. DAs were appraised using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). We collected information on the involvement of interprofessional teams, including nurses, in their development and use. RESULTS: After reviewing 10 337 database citations and 924 grey literature citations, we extracted characteristics of 33 included DAs. DAs addressed a variety of decision points. Nearly half (42%) were relevant to older adults. Several DAs did not meet IPDAS criteria. Involvement of nurses and interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs was minimal (33.3% of DAs). CONCLUSION: DAs concerned a variety of decisions, especially those related to older people. This reflects the complexity of decisions and need for better support in this sector. There is little evidence about the involvement of interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs in home and community care settings. An interprofessional approach to designing DAs for home care could facilitate SDM with people being cared for by teams. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020169450.

Treatments, resource utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments across pandemic waves: an observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN).

BACKGROUND: Treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) evolved between pandemic waves. Our objective was to compare treatments, acute care utilization, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting to emergency departments (ED) across pandemic waves. METHODS: This observational study enrolled consecutive eligible COVID-19 patients presenting to 46 EDs participating in the Canadian COVID-19 ED Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) between March 1 and December 31, 2020. We collected data by retrospective chart review. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included treatments, hospital and ICU admissions, ED revisits and readmissions. Logistic regression modeling assessed the impact of pandemic wave on outcomes. RESULTS: We enrolled 9,967 patients in 8 provinces, 3,336 from the first and 6,631 from the second wave. Patients in the second wave were younger, fewer met criteria for severe COVID-19, and more were discharged from the ED. Adjusted for patient characteristics and disease severity, steroid use increased (odds ratio [OR] 7.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.2-8.9), and invasive mechanical ventilation decreased (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.4-0.7) in the second wave compared to the first. After adjusting for differences in patient characteristics and disease severity, the odds of hospitalization (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) and critical care admission (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.9) decreased, while mortality remained unchanged (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.1). INTERPRETATION: In patients presenting to cute care facilities, we observed rapid uptake of evidence-based therapies and less use of experimental therapies in the second wave. We observed increased rates of ED discharges and lower hospital and critical care resource use over time. Substantial reductions in mechanical ventilation were not associated with increasing mortality. Advances in treatment strategies created health system efficiencies without compromising patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04702945.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Le traitement de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) a évolué entre les vagues pandémiques. Notre objectif était de comparer les traitements, l'utilisation des soins aigus et les résultats des patients atteints de la maladie COVID-19 se présentant aux urgences à travers les vagues de pandémie. MéTHODES: Cette étude observationnelle a recruté des patients COVID-19 éligibles consécutifs se présentant à 46 services d'urgence participant au Réseau canadien de réponse rapide aux services d'urgence COVID-19 (CCEDRRN) entre le 1er mars et le 31 décembre 2020. Nous avons recueilli des données au moyen d'un examen rétrospectif des dossiers. Notre principal résultat a été la mortalité à l'hôpital. Les résultats secondaires incluaient les traitements, les admissions à l'hôpital et aux soins intensifs, les revisites aux urgences et les réadmissions. La modélisation par régression logistique a évalué l'impact de la vague de pandémie sur les résultats. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recruté 9 967 patients dans 8 provinces, 3 336 de la première vague et 6 631 de la deuxième vague. Les patients de la deuxième vague étaient plus jeunes, moins nombreux à répondre aux critères de gravité de la COVID-19 et plus nombreux à quitter les urgences. Après ajustement en fonction des caractéristiques des patients et de la gravité de la maladie, le recours aux stéroïdes a augmenté (rapport de cotes [RC] 7.4 ; intervalle de confiance à 95 % [IC] 6.2­8.9) et la ventilation mécanique invasive a diminué (RC 0.5 ; IC à 95 % 0.4­0.7) lors de la deuxième vague par rapport à la première. Après ajustement pour tenir compte des différences dans les caractéristiques des patients et la gravité de la maladie, les probabilités d'hospitalisation (RC 0.7 ; IC à 95 % 0.6­0.8) et d'admission en soins intensifs (RC 0.7 ; IC à 95 % 0.6­0.9) ont diminué, tandis que la mortalité est restée inchangée (RC 0.7 ; IC à 95 % 0.5­1.1). INTERPRéTATION: Chez les patients se présentant dans les établissements de soins de santé, nous avons observé une adoption rapide des thérapies fondées sur des données probantes et un moindre recours aux thérapies expérimentales lors de la deuxième vague. Nous avons observé une augmentation des taux de sortie des services d'urgence et une diminution de l'utilisation des ressources hospitalières et des soins intensifs au fil du temps. Les réductions substantielles de la ventilation mécanique n'étaient pas associées à une augmentation de la mortalité. Les progrès réalisés dans les stratégies de traitement ont permis d'améliorer l'efficacité des systèmes de santé sans compromettre les résultats pour les patients.

The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score to predict death among nonpalliative patients with COVID-19 presenting to emergency departments: a derivation and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Predicting mortality from COVID-19 using information available when patients present to the emergency department can inform goals-of-care decisions and assist with ethical allocation of critical care resources. The study objective was to develop and validate a clinical score to predict emergency department and in-hospital mortality among consecutive nonpalliative patients with COVID-19; in this study, we define palliative patients as those who do not want resuscitative measures, such as intubation, intensive care unit care or cardiopulmonary resuscitation. METHODS: This derivation and validation study used observational cohort data recruited from 46 hospitals in 8 Canadian provinces participating in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN). We included adult (age ≥ 18 yr) nonpalliative patients with confirmed COVID-19 who presented to the emergency department of a participating site between Mar. 1, 2020, and Jan. 31, 2021. We randomly assigned hospitals to derivation or validation, and prespecified clinical variables as candidate predictors. We used logistic regression to develop the score in a derivation cohort and examined its performance in predicting emergency department and in-hospital mortality in a validation cohort. RESULTS: Of 8761 eligible patients, 618 (7.0%) died. The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score included age, sex, type of residence, arrival mode, chest pain, severe liver disease, respiratory rate and level of respiratory support. The area under the curve was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.93) in derivation and 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.93) in validation. The score had excellent calibration. These results suggest that scores of 6 or less would categorize patients as being at low risk for in-hospital death, with a negative predictive value of 99.9%. Patients in the low-risk group had an in-hospital mortality rate of 0.1%. Patients with a score of 15 or higher had an observed mortality rate of 81.0%. INTERPRETATION: The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Mortality Score is a simple score that can be used for level-of-care discussions with patients and in situations of critical care resource constraints to accurately predict death using variables available on emergency department arrival. The score was derived and validated mostly in unvaccinated patients, and before variants of concern were circulating widely and newer treatment regimens implemented in Canada. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04702945.

CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score (CCIS): development and validation in a Canadian cohort of a clinical risk score to predict SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a clinical risk score that can accurately quantify the probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients presenting to an emergency department without the need for laboratory testing. DESIGN: Cohort study of participants in the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN) registry. Regression models were fitted to predict a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result using clinical and demographic predictors, as well as an indicator of local SARS-CoV-2 incidence. SETTING: 32 emergency departments in eight Canadian provinces. PARTICIPANTS: 27 665 consecutively enrolled patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in participating emergency departments between 1 March and 30 October 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test result within 14 days of an index emergency department encounter for suspected COVID-19 disease. RESULTS: We derived a 10-item CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score using data from 21 743 patients. This score included variables from history and physical examination and an indicator of local disease incidence. The score had a c-statistic of 0.838 with excellent calibration. We externally validated the rule in 5295 patients. The score maintained excellent discrimination and calibration and had superior performance compared with another previously published risk score. Score cut-offs were identified that can rule-in or rule-out SARS-CoV-2 infection without the need for nucleic acid testing with 97.4% sensitivity (95% CI 96.4 to 98.3) and 95.9% specificity (95% CI 95.5 to 96.0). CONCLUSIONS: The CCEDRRN COVID-19 Infection Score uses clinical characteristics and publicly available indicators of disease incidence to quantify a patient's probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The score can identify patients at sufficiently high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection to warrant isolation and empirical therapy prior to test confirmation while also identifying patients at sufficiently low risk of infection that they may not need testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04702945.

Adverse Events Associated With Electrical Cardioversion in Patients With Acute Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate safety of electrical cardioversion (ECV) for patients with acute atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was an analysis of data from 4 multicentre AF/AFL studies conducted from 2008 to 2019 at 23 large EDs. We included adult patients who received attempts at ECV and who had presented acutely after symptom onset. Staff manually reviewed study and clinical records to abstract data. RESULTS: We evaluated 1736 ECV cases with a mean age of 60.1 years and 67.1% male. The overall success of ECV was 90.2% (95% confidence interval 88.7%-91.6%), with 4.9% of patients admitted. ED physicians performed the ECV in 95.2% and provided sedation in 96.5%; 13.9% (12.3%-15.7%) of cases experienced important adverse events that required treatment, and 0.4% were classified as life threatening. Another 5.6% had adverse events that did not require treatment. Logistic regression found that the RAFF-3 study cohort (odds ratio [OR] 2.0), age ≥ 85 years (OR 2.1), coronary artery disease (OR 1.5), midazolam (OR 1.9), and fentanyl (OR 1.5) were associated with important adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This large evaluation of the safety of ECV for acute AF/AFL in the ED found that while serious adverse events were rare, there were a concerning number of events following sedation that required intervention. Physicians should be aware that older age, coronary artery disease, and fentanyl are associated with higher risks of important adverse events. This study provides more information for shared decision making discussions with patients when choosing between drug-shock and shock-only cardioversion strategies.

RAFF-3 Trial: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomised Trial to Improve Care of Acute Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: We sought to improve care of patients with acute atrial fibrillation (AF) and flutter (AFL) in the emergency department (ED) by implementing the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Acute AF/AFL Best Practices Checklist. METHODS: We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial at 11 large community and academic hospital EDs in 5 Canadian provinces and enrolled consecutive AF/AFL patients. The study intervention was introduction of the CAEP Checklist with the use of a knowledge translation-implementation approach that included behaviour change techniques and organisation/system-level strategies. The primary outcome was length of stay in ED, and secondary outcomes were discharge home, use of rhythm control, adverse events, and 30-day status. Analysis used mixed-effects regression adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Patient visits in the control (n = 314) and intervention (n = 404) periods were similar with mean age 62.9 years, 54% male, 71% onset < 12 hours, and 86% AF, 14% AFL. We observed a reduction in length of stay of 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.5%-33.8%; P = 0.01), an increase in use of rhythm control (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% CI 1.8-11.6; P = 0.002), and a decrease in use of rate-control medications (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9; P = 0.02). There was no change in adverse events and no strokes or deaths by 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The RAFF-3 trial led to optimised care of AF/AFL patients with decreased ED lengths of stay, increased ED rhythm control by drug or electricity, and no increase in adverse events. Early cardioversion allows AF/AFL patients to quickly resume normal activities.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital and intensive care in the first phase of the pandemic in Canada: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical data on patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provide clinicians and public health officials with information to guide practice and policy. The aims of this study were to describe patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital and intensive care, and to investigate predictors of outcome to characterize severe acute respiratory infection. METHODS: This observational cohort study used Canadian data from 32 selected hospitals included in a global multisite cohort between Jan. 24 and July 7, 2020. Adult and pediatric patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 who received care in an intensive care unit (ICU) and a sampling of up to the first 60 patients receiving care on hospital wards were included. We performed descriptive analyses of characteristics, interventions and outcomes. The primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality, with secondary analyses of the length of hospital and ICU stay. RESULTS: Between January and July 2020, among 811 patients admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19, the median age was 64 (interquartile range [IQR] 53-75) years, 495 (61.0%) were men, 46 (5.7%) were health care workers, 9 (1.1%) were pregnant, 26 (3.2%) were younger than 18 years and 9 (1.1%) were younger than 5 years. The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 7 (IQR 3-10) days. The most common symptoms on admission were fever, shortness of breath, cough and malaise. Diabetes, hypertension and cardiac, kidney and respiratory disease were the most common comorbidities. Among all patients, 328 received care in an ICU, admitted a median of 0 (IQR 0-1) days after hospital admission. Critically ill patients received treatment with invasive mechanical ventilation (88.8%), renal replacement therapy (14.9%) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (4.0%); 26.2% died. Among those receiving mechanical ventilation, 31.2% died. Age was an influential predictor of mortality (odds ratio per additional year of life 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.09). INTERPRETATION: Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 commonly had fever, respiratory symptoms and comorbid conditions. Increasing age was associated with the development of critical illness and death; however, most critically ill patients in Canada, including those requiring mechanical ventilation, survived and were discharged from hospital.

Starting, building and sustaining a program of research in emergency medicine in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To develop pragmatic recommendations for starting, building and sustaining a program of research in emergency medicine (EM) in Canada at sites with limited infrastructure and/or prior research experience. METHODS: At the direction of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) academic section, we assembled an expert panel of 10 EM researchers with experience building programs of research. Using a modified Delphi approach, our panel developed initial recommendations for (1) starting, (2) building, and (3) sustaining a program of research in EM. These recommendations were peer-reviewed by emergency physicians and researchers from each of the panelist's home institutions and tested for face and construct validity, as well as ease of comprehension. The recommendations were then iteratively revised based on feedback and suggestions from peer review and amended again after being presented at the 2020 CAEP academic symposium. RESULTS: Our panel created 15 pragmatic recommendations for those intending to start (formal research training, find mentors, local support, develop a niche, start small), build (funding, build a team, collaborate, publish, expect failure) and sustain (become a mentor, obtain leadership roles, lead national studies, gain influence, prioritize wellness) a program of EM research in centers without an established research culture. Additionally, we suggest four recommendations for department leads aiming to foster a program of research within their departments. CONCLUSION: These recommendations serve as guidance for centres wanting to establish a program of research in EM.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Développer des recommandations pragmatiques pour lancer, établir et soutenir un programme de recherche en médecine d'urgence (MU) au Canada dans des sites avec une infrastructure et / ou une expérience de recherche antérieure limitée. MéTHODES: Sous la direction de la section académique de l'Association canadienne des médecins d'urgence (ACMU), nous avons réuni un comité d'experts de 10 chercheurs en MU possédant de l'expérience dans le développement des programmes de recherche. En utilisant une approche Delphi modifiée, notre comité a mis en place des recommandations initiales pour 1) lancer, 2) établir et 3) soutenir un programme de recherche en MU. Ces recommandations ont été examinées par des médecins d'urgence et des chercheurs appartenant aux établissements d'origine des chacun des membres de comité et ont été testées pour leur validité apparente et conceptuelle, ainsi que leur facilité de compréhension. Les recommandations ont ensuite été fréquemment révisées en fonction des commentaires et suggestions de l'examen des pairs et modifiées à nouveau après avoir été présentées au symposium académique 2020 de l'ACMU. RéSULTATS: Notre comité a créé 15 recommandations pragmatiques pour ceux qui ont l'intention de lancer (formation formelle en recherche, trouver des mentors, soutien local, développer un créneau, débuter à petite échelle), d'établir (financer, constituer une équipe, collaborer, publier, s'attendre à l'échec) et de soutenir (devenir un mentor, obtenir des rôles de leadership, diriger des études nationales, gagner en influence, prioriser le bien-être) un programme de recherche en MU dans des centres sans culture de la recherche établie. De plus, nous suggérons 4 recommandations aux responsables de département visant à promouvoir un programme de recherche au sein de leur département. CONCLUSION: Ces recommandations servent de guide aux centres qui souhaitent établir un programme de recherche en MU.