The effect of visitation restrictions on ED error.

EDs restricted visitors during the COVID-19 pandemic on the assumption that the risks of disease spread outweighed the psychological benefits of liberal visitation. But data suggest that beyond providing emotional support, family and caregivers can clarify history, improve patient monitoring, and advocate for patients-actions that can improve quality of care. Our objective was to assess whether removing visitors from the bedside contributed to errors in emergency care. We reviewed a database of medical errors covering visits from 11/15/17 to 7/30/22 at an urban, tertiary-care, academic ED for five types of error amenable to visitor intervention: inadequate history gathering, inadequate monitoring, falls, giving a medication to which a patient is allergic, and inappropriate medication dosing. These records were reviewed by two investigators to determine the likelihood visitor presence could have prevented the error. For those errors judged susceptible to visitor intercession, the number in each category was compared for the period before and after strict restrictions took effect. Our review found 27/781 (3.5%) errors in the pre-pandemic period and 27/568 (4.8%) errors in the pandemic period fell into one of these five categories (p = 0.29). Visitors prevented harm from reaching the patient in three of 27 pre-pandemic errors (11.1%), compared to 0 out of 27 peri-pandemic errors (p = 0.23). On review by two attendings, 17/24 (70.8%) errors that reached the patient in the pre-pandemic period were judged amenable to visitor intervention, compared to 25/27 (92.6%) in the pandemic period (p = 0.09). There were no statistically significant differences in the categories of error between the two groups; monitoring errors came the closest: 1/17 (5.9%) pre-COVID errors amenable to visitor intervention in these categories were monitoring related, whereas 7/25 (28.0%) post-COVID errors were (p = 0.16). While this study did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in error between lenient and restrictive visitation eras, we did find multiple cases in the pre-COVID era in which family presence prevented error, and qualitative review of post-COVID errors suggested many could have been prevented by family presence. Larger trials are needed to determine how frequent and consequential such errors are and how to balance the public health imperative of curbing disease spread with the harm caused by restricting visitation.

Substance abuse in emergency department patients with unexplained syncope.

Current data suggest that up to 60 % of patients presenting to the ED with syncope leave the hospital without a defined etiology. Although a relationship between syncope and substance abuse has been described, no study to date has looked at the relationship between syncope of unknown etiology and substance abuse in patients presenting to the ED. The objective of the study was to determine whether a history of or current substance abuse is associated with an increased incidence of syncope of unknown etiology in ED patients. A prospective, observational, cohort study of consecutive ED patients aged ≥18 who presented with syncope was conducted between 6/03 and 7/06. Patients were queried in the ED and charts reviewed about a history of or current substance abuse. Substance abuse was defined as consumption of >2 alcoholic beverages nightly, repetitive use of any illicit substances, or documentation by the patient's physician of concern regarding suspected substance abuse. Data were analyzed using SAS with Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. We enrolled 518 patients who presented to the ED after syncope, 161 of whom did not have an identifiable etiology for their syncopal event. 62 patients had a history of, or current substance abuse. Among patients with a history of, or current substance abuse, 45 % had unexplained syncope, as opposed to 29 % of patients without such a history (p = 0.01). Our results suggest that prior and current substance abuse is associated with increased incidence of syncope of unknown etiology. Patients evaluated in the ED or even hospitalized with syncope of unknown etiology may benefit from substance abuse screening and possibly detoxification referral.

The prevalence of psychiatric disease in emergency department patients with unexplained syncope.

Current data suggest that up to 60 % of patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope leave the hospital without a defined etiology. Prior studies suggest a prevalence of psychiatric disease as high as 26 % in patients with syncope of unknown etiology. The objective of this study was to determine whether psychiatric disease is associated with an increased incidence of syncope of unknown etiology. Prospective, observational, cohort study of consecutive ED patients >18 presenting with syncope was conducted from 6/03 to 7/06. Patients were queried in the ED and charts reviewed for a history of psychiatric disease and use of psychiatric medication. Data were analyzed using SAS v9.2 with Fisher's exact tests. We enrolled 518 patients who presented to the ED after syncope, 161 (31 %) did not have an identifiable etiology for their syncopal event; 166 patients (32 %) had a history of or current psychiatric disease. Among men with psychiatric disease, 37 % had an unknown etiology of their syncopal event, compared to 23 % of men without psychiatric disease (p = 0.04). However, among women with syncope of unknown etiology, there was no significant difference between those with and without psychiatric disease (34.4 vs. 32.7 %) with p = 0.77. Our results suggest that men with psychiatric disease have an increased incidence of syncope of unknown etiology. Given this relationship, clinicians might consider screening for psychiatric disorders in syncopal patients when no clear etiology can be identified.