Choosing Wisely Canada's emergency medicine recommendations: Time for a revision.

Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) is a national initiative designed to encourage patient-clinician discussions about the appropriate, evidence-based use of medical tests, procedures and treatments. The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians' (CAEP) Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) working group developed and released ten recommendations relevant to Emergency Medicine in June 2015 (items 1-5) and October 2016 (items 6-10). In November 2016, the CAEP CWC working group developed a process for updating the recommendations. This process involves: 1) Using GRADE to evaluate the quality of evidence, 2) reviewing relevant recommendations on an ad hoc basis as new evidence emerges, and 3) reviewing all recommendations every five years. While the full review of the CWC recommendations will be performed in 2020, a number of high-impact studies were published after our initial launch that prompted an ad hoc review of the relevant three of our ten recommendations prior to the full review in 2020. This paper describes the results of the CAEP CWC working group's ad hoc review of three of our ten recommendations in light of recent publications.

L'initiative nationale Choisir avec soin a été conçue pour favoriser les discussions entre patients et cliniciens sur l'utilisation appropriée et fondée sur des données probantes des examens médicaux, des interventions et des traitements. Le groupe de travail sur l'initiative, de l'Association canadienne des médecins d'urgence, a élaboré et diffusé dix recommandations relatives à la pratique de la médecine d'urgence, d'abord en juin 2015 (points 1-5), puis en octobre 2016 (points 6-10). En novembre 2016, le groupe de travail sur l'initiative s'est penché sur un processus de mise à jour des recommandations. Ce dernier comprend trois éléments : 1) l'application de l'instrument GRADE pour évaluer la qualité des données probantes; 2) une révision ponctuelle des recommandations pertinentes suivant la diffusion de nouvelles données; 3) un réexamen quinquennal de toutes les recommandations. La révision complète des recommandations présentées dans l'initiative est prévue en 2020; toutefois, un certain nombre d'études ayant une incidence importante ont déjà été publiées après le premier lancement des recommandations, ce qui a incité le groupe de travail à procéder à une révision ponctuelle de trois recommandations pertinentes sur les dix existantes, avant l'examen complet prévu en 2020. Il sera donc question, dans l'article, des résultats de la révision ponctuelle de ces trois recommandations, réalisée à la lumière des récentes publications, par le groupe de travail sur l'initiative.

Quality improvement primer part 3: Evaluating and sustaining a quality improvement project in the emergency department.

Quality improvement (QI) and patient safety are two areas that have grown into important operational and academic fields in recent years in health care, including in emergency medicine (EM). This is the third and final article in a series designed as a QI primer for EM clinicians. In the first two articles we used a fictional case study of a team trying to decrease the time to antibiotic therapy for patients with sepsis who were admitted through their emergency department. We introduced concepts of strategic planning, including stakeholder engagement and root cause analysis tools, and presented the Model for Improvement and Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles as the backbone of the execution of a QI project. This article will focus on the measurement and evaluation of QI projects, including run charts, as well as methods that can be used to ensure the sustainability of change management projects.

Quality improvement primer part 2: executing a quality improvement project in the emergency department.

The topics of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety have become important themes in health care in recent years, particularly in the emergency department setting, which is a frequent point of contact with the health care system for patients. In the first of three articles in this series meant as a QI primer for emergency medicine clinicians, we introduced the strategic planning required to develop an effective QI project using a fictional case study as an example. In this second article we continue with our example of improving time to antibiotics for patients with sepsis, and introduce the Model for Improvement. We will review what makes a good aim statement, the various categories of measures that can be tracked during a QI project, and the relative merits and challenges of potential change concepts and ideas. We will also present the Model for Improvement's rapid-cycle change methodology, the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle. The final article in this series will focus on the evaluation and sustainability of QI projects.

Quality improvement primer part 1: Preparing for a quality improvement project in the emergency department.

Emergency medicine (EM) providers work in a fast-paced and often hectic environment that has a high risk for patient safety incidents and gaps in the quality of care. These challenges have resulted in opportunities for frontline EM providers to play a role in quality improvement (QI) projects. QI has developed into a mature field with methodologies that can dramatically improve the odds of having a successful project with a sustainable impact. However, this expertise is not yet commonly taught during professional training. In this first of three articles meant as a QI primer for EM clinicians, we will introduce QI methodology and strategic planning using a fictional case study as an example. We will review how to identify a QI problem, define components of an effective problem statement, and identify stakeholders and core change team members. We will also describe three techniques used to perform root cause analyses-Ishikawa diagrams, Pareto charts and process mapping-and how they relate to preparing for a QI project. The next two papers in this series will focus on the execution of the QI project itself using rapid-cycle testing and on the evaluation and sustainability of QI projects.

Patients' Perspectives on Outcomes of Care After Discharge From the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Much effort has been expended to understand what care experiences patients value in the emergency department (ED), yet little is known about which outcomes patients value after ED care. Our goal is to define outcomes of ED care that are valued by patients discharged from the ED, with the goal of informing the development of a patient-reported outcome measure for ED care. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with patients recruited during their care at 1 of 2 EDs and interviewed in either English or French 1 to 9 days after their visit. Patients who were hospitalized were excluded. Interviews focused on perceived outcomes of care since the ED visit and expectations of care before the ED visit. We identified themes with standard descriptive content analysis techniques and a modified version of the constant comparative method, drawing on grounded theory methods. RESULTS: We interviewed 46 patients in English (n=38) or French (n=8). Participants with diverse reasons for seeking care appeared to value common outcomes from ED care that centered around 4 themes: understanding the cause and expected trajectory of their symptoms; reassurance; symptom relief; and having a plan to manage their symptoms, resolve their issue, or pursue further medical care. These themes were also reflected in the expectations participants recalled having when they decided to seek care in the ED. CONCLUSION: The 4 outcomes defined constitute areas for improvement and will inform the development of an ED patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Consideration should be given to measuring patient-reported outcomes separately from patient experience.

Choosing Wisely Canada®: Five tests, procedures and treatments to question in Emergency Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) is an initiative to encourage patient-physician discussions about the appropriate, evidence based use of medical tests, procedures and treatments. We present the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians' (CAEP) top five list of recommendations, and the process undertaken to generate them. METHODS: The CAEP Expert Working Group (EWG) generated a candidate list of 52 tests, procedures, and treatments in emergency medicine whose value to care was questioned. This list was distributed to CAEP committee chairs, revised, and then divided and randomly allocated to 107 Canadian emergency physicians (EWG nominated) who voted on each item based on: action-ability, effectiveness, safety, economic burden, and frequency of use. The EWG discussed the items with the highest votes, and generated the recommendations by consensus. RESULTS: The top five CAEP CWC recommendations are: 1) Don't order CT head scans in adults and children who have suffered minor head injuries (unless positive for a validated head injury clinical decision rule); 2) Don't prescribe antibiotics in adults with bronchitis/asthma and children with bronchiolitis; 3) Don't order lumbosacral spinal imaging in patients with non-traumatic low back pain who have no red flags/pathologic indicators; 4) Don't order neck radiographs in patients who have a negative examination using the Canadian C-spine rules; and 5) Don't prescribe antibiotics after incision and drainage of uncomplicated skin abscesses unless extensive cellulitis exists. CONCLUSIONS: The CWC recommendations for emergency medicine were selected using a mixed methods approach. This top 5 list was released at the CAEP Conference in June 2015 and should form the basis for future implementation efforts.

Effect of a Multi-Diagnosis Observation Unit on Emergency Department Length of Stay and Inpatient Admission Rate at Two Canadian Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Observation units (OUs) have been shown to reduce emergency department (ED) lengths of stay (LOS) and admissions. Most published studies have been on OUs managing single complaints. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine whether an OU reduces ED LOS and hospital admission rates for adults with a variety of presenting complaints. METHODS: We comparatively evaluated two hospitals in British Columbia, Canada (hereafter ED A and ED B) using a pre-post design. Data were extracted from administrative databases. The post-OU cohort included all adults presenting 6 months after OU implementation. The pre-OU cohort included all adults presenting in the same 6-month period 1 year before OU implementation. RESULTS: There were 109,625 patient visits during the study period. Of the 56,832 visits during the post-OU period (27,512 to ED A and 29,318 to ED B), 1.9% were managed in the OU in ED A and 1.4% in ED B. Implementation was associated with an increase in the median ED LOS at ED A (179.0 min pre vs. 192.0 min post [+13.0 min]; p < 0.001; mean difference -12.5 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] -15.2 to -9.9 min), but no change at ED B (182.0 min pre vs. 182.0 min post; p = 0.55; mean difference +2.0 min, 95% CI -0.7 to +4.7 min). Implementation significantly decreased the hospital admission rate for ED A (17.8% pre to 17.0% post [-0.8%], 95% CI -0.18% to 0.15%; p < 0.05) and did not significantly change the hospital admission rate at ED B (18.9% pre to 18.3% post [-0.6%], 95% CI -1.19% to -0.09%; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: A multi-diagnosis OU can reduce hospital admission rate in a site-specific manner. In contrast to previous studies, we did not find that an OU reduced ED LOS. Further research is needed to determine whether OUs can reduce ED overcrowding.

Conducting Effective Physician Performance Feedback: A Primer for Healthcare Leaders.

Physician performance feedback (PPF) can help physicians gain insight into their practice, to identify areas for improvement, and to implement changes to improve care. There is increasing interest in the use of PPF in Canada. However, little is known about the different types of PPF methods and whether PPF can lead to improved physician performance and patient outcomes. We provide a primer for healthcare leaders interested in doing PPF by reviewing common PPF methods. We then describe our institution's experience with physician multi-source feedback and provide strategies to conduct meaningful PPF.

British Columbia's pay-for-performance experiment: part of the solution to reduce emergency department crowding?

BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) overcrowding continues to be a well-publicized problem in a number of countries. In British Columbia, a province in Canada, an ED pay-for-performance (ED P4P) program was initiated in 2007 to create financial incentives for hospitals to reduce patients' ED length of stay (ED LOS). This study's objectives are to determine if the ED P4P program is associated with decreases in ED LOS, and to address the ED P4P program's limitations. METHODS: We analyze monthly hospital-level ED LOS time data since the inception of the financial incentives. Since the ED P4P program was phased in at different hospitals from different health authorities over time, hospitals' data from only two regional health authorities are included in the study. RESULTS: We find association between the implementation of ED P4P and ED LOS time data. However, due to the lack of control data, the findings cannot demonstrate causality. Furthermore, our findings are from hospitals in the greater Vancouver area only. INTERPRETATION: BC's ED P4P was introduced to create incentives for hospitals to reduce ED LOS by providing incremental incentive funding. Available data indicate that the ED P4P program is associated with mixed successes in reducing ED LOS among participating hospitals.

A taxonomy for community-based care programs focused on HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care in resource-poor settings.

Community-based care (CBC) can increase access to key services for people affected by HIV/AIDS through the mobilization of community interests and resources and their integration with formal health structures. Yet, the lack of a systematic framework for analysis of CBC focused on HIV/AIDS impedes our ability to understand and study CBC programs. We sought to develop taxonomy of CBC programs focused on HIV/AIDS in resource-limited settings in an effort to understand their key characteristics, uncover any gaps in programming, and highlight the potential roles they play. Our review aimed to systematically identify key CBC programs focused on HIV/AIDS in resource-limited settings. We used both bibliographic database searches (Medline, CINAHL, and EMBASE) for peer-reviewed literature and internet-based searches for gray literature. Our search terms were 'HIV' or 'AIDS' and 'community-based care' or 'CBC'. Two co-authors developed a descriptive taxonomy through an iterative, inductive process using the retrieved program information. We identified 21 CBC programs useful for developing taxonomy. Extensive variation was observed within each of the nine categories identified: region, vision, characteristics of target populations, program scope, program operations, funding models, human resources, sustainability, and monitoring and evaluation strategies. While additional research may still be needed to identify the conditions that lead to overall program success, our findings can help to inform our understanding of the various aspects of CBC programs and inform potential logic models for CBC programming in the context of HIV/AIDS in resource-limited settings. Importantly, the findings of the present study can be used to develop sustainable HIV/AIDS-service delivery programs in regions with health resource shortages.