Outcomes by time-to-OR for penetrating abdominal trauma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Time-To-OR is a critical process measure for trauma performance. However, this measure has not consistently demonstrated improvement in outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Using TQIP, we identified facilities by 75th percentile time-to-OR to categorize slow, average, and fast hospitals. Using a GEE model, we calculated odds of mortality for all penetrating abdominal trauma patients, firearm injuries only, and patients with major complication by facility speed. We additionally estimated odds of mortality at the patient level. RESULTS: Odds of mortality for patients at slow facilities was 1.095; 95% CI: 0.746, 1.608; p = 0.64 compared to average. Fast facility OR = 0.941; 95% CI: 0.780, 1.133; p = 0.52. At the patient-level each additional minute of time-to-OR was associated with 1.5% decreased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.985; 95% CI:0.981, 0.989; p < 0.001). For firearm-only patients, facility speed was not associated with odds of in-hospital mortality (p-value = 0.61). Person-level time-to-OR was associated with 1.8% decreased odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.982; 95% CI: 0.977, 0.987; p < 0.001) with each additional minute of time-to-OR. Similarly, failure-to-rescue analysis showed no difference in in-hospital mortality at the patient level (p = 0.62) and 0.4% decreased odds of in-hospital mortality with each additional minute of time-to-OR at the patient level (OR 0.996; 95% CI: 0.993, 0.999; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Despite the use of time-to-OR as a metric of trauma performance, there is little evidence for improvement in mortality or complication rate with improved time-to-OR at the facility or patient level. Performance metrics for trauma should be developed that more appropriately approximate patient outcome.

Return Rates for Opioid versus Nonopioid Management of Patients with Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that opioid treatment for abdominal pain, which comprises a large proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), may contribute to long-term opioid use without significant benefits with regard to symptom management. OBJECTIVES: This study seeks to assess the association between opioid use for management of abdominal pain in the ED and return ED visits for abdominal pain within 30 days for patients discharged from the ED at initial presentation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter observational study of adult patients presenting to and discharged from 21 EDs with a chief concern of abdominal pain between November 2018 and April 2020. The proportion of 30-day return visits to the ED for patients who received opioid analgesics was compared with a reference group of patients who only received acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or both. RESULTS: Of the 4745 patients, 1304 (27.5%) received opioids and 1101 (23.2%) only received either acetaminophen, NSAIDs, or both. Among those given opioids, 287 (22.0%) returned to the ED for abdominal pain within 30 days, compared with 162 (14.7%) of those in the reference group (odds ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.27-1.95, p-value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients given opioids for abdominal pain in the ED had 57% increased odds of a return ED visit within 30 days compared with those given only acetaminophen or NSAIDs. This warrants further research on the use of nonopioid analgesics in the ED, especially in patients with anticipated discharge.

Use of a Structured Observation Tool to Promote Medical Student Engagement in Trauma Resuscitations.

OBJECTIVE: We describe a novel approach to promoting medical student learning and engagement during trauma resuscitation with implementation of a structured observation and debriefing tool. DESIGN: In the context of a multifaceted quality improvement effort in our emergency room, we implemented a structured trauma observation tool (SOT) for medical students based on ATLS trauma guidelines. The SOT reflects the American College of Surgeons and Association for Surgical Education (ACS/ASE) trauma evaluation module for medical students. Two medical students from our quality improvement working group undertook a proof-of-concept study to determine whether the SOT facilitated accurate observations of trauma resuscitations and promoted educational debriefs with precepting providers. Results were encouraging, so the tool was implemented for elective use on surgical clerkships. Clerkship students who used the SOT were given the opportunity to share its impact on their experience. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained under Pro00109569. SETTING: A large level 1 trauma center at an academic hospital in the southeastern United States. PARTICIPANTS: An interdisciplinary working group including surgeons, emergency medicine physicians, nurses, and students developed the observation tool. Two medical students from this team showed that the tool was effective at guiding observations and facilitating debriefs prior to its broader implementation on the general surgery clerkship. RESULTS: A total of 630 resuscitation tasks were observed during 15 trauma activations prior to implementation on the surgery clerkship. There was over 97% agreement between students observations and evaluating physicians self-reporting on which tasks were completed. Tasks on which there was disagreement were discussed to aid student learning. The tool was implemented for elective use on the surgery clerkship where students reported positive experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Early data suggest that this structured observation tool facilitates accurate trauma assessment observations and provides an opportunity for high-yield debriefs with the evaluating physician. This promotes student comprehension of ATLS principles. The SOT is being implemented as a pedagogic tool for students on the surgery clerkship to guide their observations, improve comprehension of decisions made in a hyperacute setting, and offer real time feedback as part of their learning in the trauma bay. The tool appears to be a valuable supplement which supports the ACS/ASE curriculum.

Resident Productivity in the Emergency Department After Implementation of an Automated Patient Assignment System; a Brief Report.

Introduction: The clinical diversity of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) allows emergency medicine (EM) and non-EM residents to sharpen their clinical skills. In most EDs, residents self-assign patients at their discretion. Our institution transitioned from a self-assignment-system to an automated-system, after which we sought to determine the productivity of our non-EM residents compared to the previous system. Methods: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, resident productivity was measured as number of patient visits per hour and per 8.5-hour shift before and after the implementation of an automated patient assignment system in emergency department. The automated-system assigns one patient at the start of the shift, another 30 minutes later, and one patient every hour thereafter, throughout the shift. Results: 28 residents performed 406 total shifts prior to implementation and 14 residents performed 252 total shifts post-implementation. The average number of patient visits per hour significantly increased from 0.52 ± 0.18 (95% CI 0.45-0.59, IQR 0.43-0.60) to 0.82 ± 0.11 (95% CI 0.75-0.88, IQR 0.74-0.89) after implementation of our assignment system (p<0.00001; figure 1). Additionally, the average number of patient visits per 8.5-hour shift significantly increased from 4.46 ± 1.53 (CI 3.86-5.05, IQR 3.66-5.08) to 6.52 ± 0.86 (CI 6.02-7.02, IQR 5.90-7.09) after the implementation of our system (p<0.00001; figure 1). Conclusion: These findings warrant further evaluation of the impact of patient assignment systems on trainee education.

A Scoping Review of Published Intimate Partner Violence Curricula for Medical Trainees.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects many, and health care has the potential to provide a safe space for individuals experiencing IPV. However, physicians cite lack of time and education as barriers. The aim of this study is to complete a review of published IPV curricula in medical school, residency training, and postresidency training. We performed a scoping review to provide a quantitative assessment and summary review of existing IPV curricula. In May 2020, a librarian conducted a search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus. We evaluated each article for the following curriculum content and structure items: (1) year introduced; (2) delivery method; (3) curriculum type; (4) curriculum content; (5) curriculum effectiveness; and (6) implementation barriers. Fifty-six articles met criteria, most were for medical school learners (n = 32, 57.1%) and short-term (lasting less than one academic year) (n = 41, 73.2%). For residency, IPV curricula were most frequently taught in family medicine, internal medicine, and emergency medicine. Formal lecture and use of standardized patients were the most popular delivery methods. Most curricula taught risk factors for and identification of individuals who have experienced IPV. The most cited implementation barrier was limited time in standard medical education, followed by inability to measure the effectiveness of the curriculum. There was great variation in the methods of assessing effectiveness of IPV curricula. Published IPV curricula are varied, without consistent validated tools for assessing efficacy. Future initiatives to establish a standard of competency for medical students regarding IPV, including a standard curriculum, may better ensure that physicians are capable of identifying and caring for individuals who have experienced IPV.

COVID-19 Impact on the Doctor-Patient Relationship: Patient Perspectives on Emergency Physician Empathy and Communication.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate in how the current COVID-19 pandemic affects patient's perceptions of emergency physician empathy and communication. METHODS: Patients cared for by Emergency Department physicians with the lowest satisfaction scores were surveyed within one week of discharge via phone. Using questions from the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) survey, patients rated their satisfaction with their Emergency provider's empathy and communication on a scale of 1 to 5 and provided feedback on how the patient-provider interaction could be improved. Demographic data and patient responses to CARE survey questions were compared between pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 time. Patient's open-ended responses were analyzed for themes related to the impact of COVID-19 on the patient-provider relationship. RESULTS: Patient median quantitative scores were 5 (4-5) across all five questions of pre-COVID-19 and 5 (4-5) during COVID-19 for all questions except two (showing care and compassion), median 5(5-5). Female patients rated provider empathy and communication lower than mens. There was no differences across age strata. A shift in provider focuses to COVID-19 only care (N=3), and an understanding of the stress on healthcare processes (N=13) from open-ended responses themes emerged of patients who want to minimize interactions within the emergency department (N=3). CONCLUSIONS: The external factor of the current pandemic did not negatively impact patient's satisfaction scores. Many patients express leniency and gratitude for emergency providers during this challenging time. Their responses seem to mirror current societal views of frontline healthcare workers.

Patient Suggestions to Improve Emergency Physician Empathy and Communication.

Emergency physician empathy and communication is increasingly important and influences patient satisfaction. This study investigated if there is a need for improvement in provider empathy and communication in our emergency department and what areas could be targeted for future improvement. Patients cared for by emergency physicians with the lowest satisfaction scores were surveyed within 1 week of discharge. Patients rated their emergency provider's empathy and communication and provided feedback on the patient-provider interaction. Compared to survey responses nationally, our providers fell between the 10th and 25th percentiles for all questions, except question 5 (making a plan of action with [the patient]) which was between the 5th and 10th percentile. Areas most frequently cited for improvement were "wanting to know why" (N = 30), "time is short" (N = 15), and "listen to the patient" (N = 13). Survey percentiles and open-ended suggestions demonstrate a need for providers to give thorough explanations, spend more time with the patient, and demonstrate active listening. These themes can be used to strengthen the provider-patient relationship.

Relationship Between Pain Management Modality and Return Rates for Lower Back Pain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that opioid use for patients with acute low back pain does not improve functional outcomes and contributes to long-term opioid use. Little is known about the impact of opioid administration in the emergency department (ED) for patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVES: This study compares 30-day return rates after administration of various pain management modalities for emergency department (ED) patients with low back pain. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter observational study of patients in the ED who were diagnosed with low back pain and discharged home in 21 EDs between November 2018 and April 2020. Patients were categorized based on the pain management they received in the ED and compared with the reference group of patients receiving only nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, or a combination of the two. The proportions of ED return visits within 30 d for each medication category was calculated and associations between analgesia categories and proportions of return visits were assessed using logistic regression models to obtain odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Patients with low back pain who received any opioid, intravenous opioid, or intramuscular opioid had significantly increased proportions of a return visit within 30 d (32% [OR 1.78 {95% CI 1.21-2.64}]; 33% [OR 1.83 {95% CI 1.18-2.86}]; and 39% [OR 2.38 {95% CI 1.35-4.12}], respectively) when compared with patients who received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (19%), acetaminophen (20%), or a combination of the two (8%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving opioids were more likely to return to the ED within 30 d than those receiving received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen. This suggests that the use of opioids for low back pain in the ED may not be an effective strategy, and there may be an opportunity to appropriately treat more of these patients with nonopioid medications.

Boarding of critically Ill patients in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department boarding is the practice of caring for admitted patients in the emergency department after hospital admission, and boarding has been a growing problem in the United States. Boarding of the critically ill has achieved specific attention because of its association with poor clinical outcomes. Accordingly, the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Emergency Physicians convened a Task Force to understand the implications of emergency department boarding of the critically ill. The objective of this article is to review the U.S. literature on (1) the frequency of emergency department boarding among the critically ill, (2) the outcomes associated with critical care patient boarding, and (3) local strategies developed to mitigate the impact of emergency department critical care boarding on patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Review article. DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Emergency department-based boarding of the critically ill patient is common, but no nationally representative frequency estimates has been reported. Boarding literature is limited by variation in the definitions used for boarding and variation in the facilities studied (boarding ranges from 2% to 88% of ICU admissions). Prolonged boarding in the emergency department has been associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and higher mortality. Health systems have developed multiple mitigation strategies to address emergency department boarding of critically ill patients, including emergency department-based interventions, hospital-based interventions, and emergency department-based resuscitation care units. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department boarding of critically ill patients was common and was associated with worse clinical outcomes. Health systems have generated a number of strategies to mitigate these effects. A definition for emergency department boarding is proposed. Future work should establish formal criteria for analysis and benchmarking of emergency department-based boarding overall, with subsequent efforts focused on developing and reporting innovative strategies that improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients boarded in the emergency department.

Boarding of Critically Ill Patients in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department boarding is the practice of caring for admitted patients in the emergency department after hospital admission, and boarding has been a growing problem in the United States. Boarding of the critically ill has achieved specific attention because of its association with poor clinical outcomes. Accordingly, the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Emergency Physicians convened a Task Force to understand the implications of emergency department boarding of the critically ill. The objective of this article is to review the U.S. literature on (1) the frequency of emergency department boarding among the critically ill, (2) the outcomes associated with critical care patient boarding, and (3) local strategies developed to mitigate the impact of emergency department critical care boarding on patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Review article. DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Emergency department-based boarding of the critically ill patient is common, but no nationally representative frequency estimates has been reported. Boarding literature is limited by variation in the definitions used for boarding and variation in the facilities studied (boarding ranges from 2% to 88% of ICU admissions). Prolonged boarding in the emergency department has been associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and higher mortality. Health systems have developed multiple mitigation strategies to address emergency department boarding of critically ill patients, including emergency department-based interventions, hospital-based interventions, and emergency department-based resuscitation care units. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department boarding of critically ill patients was common and was associated with worse clinical outcomes. Health systems have generated a number of strategies to mitigate these effects. A definition for emergency department boarding is proposed. Future work should establish formal criteria for analysis and benchmarking of emergency department-based boarding overall, with subsequent efforts focused on developing and reporting innovative strategies that improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients boarded in the emergency department.

Spatial methods for evaluating critical care and trauma transport: A scoping review.

PURPOSE: The objective of this scoping review is to inform future applications of spatial research regarding transportation of critically ill patients. We hypothesized that this review would reveal gaps and limitations in the current research regarding use of spatial methods for critical care and trauma transport research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four online databases, Ovid Medline, PubMed, Embase and Scopus, were searched. Studies were selected if they used geospatial methods to analyze a patient transports dataset. 12 studies were included in this review. RESULTS: Majority of the studies employed spatial methods only to calculate travel time or distance even though methods and tools for more complex spatial analyses are widely available. Half of the studies were found to focus on hospital bypass, 2 studies focused on transportation (air or ground) mode selection, 2 studies compared predicted versus actual travel times, and 2 studies used spatial modeling to understand spatial variation in travel times. CONCLUSIONS: There is a gap between the availability of spatial tools and their usage for analyzing and improving medical transportation. The adoption of geospatially guided transport decisions can meaningfully impact healthcare expenditures, especially in healthcare systems looking to strategically control expenditures with minimum impact on patient outcomes.

Prevalence of skin cancer in Native American kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Skin cancer prevalence is well-characterized for white solid organ transplant recipients. Although the prevalence of skin cancer in non-white (Black, Asian, Hispanic) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) has been assessed, no study has reported the prevalence of skin cancer in Native American (NA) KTRs. The aim of this study is to determine if the prevalence of skin cancer in NAKTRs is the same as in white KTRs. METHODS: We conducted a case-controlled retrospective review from a single transplant center. One hundred thirteen NAKTRs who received a transplant between 2001 and 2011 were age- and transplant-year matched with 113 white controls. RESULTS: The 226 KTRs consisted of 141 (62.4%) men and 85 (37.6%) women, with a mean age of 50.2 ± 10.8 years. There was no skin cancer found in NAKTRs prior to or post transplantation, while seven (6.2%) white KTRs had eight skin cancers prior to transplantation, and 28 (24.8%) white KTRs developed 66 skin cancers post transplantation. Twenty-two (19.5%) NAKTRs did not follow-up with dermatology at this institution. The median follow-up in NAKTRs was 3.3 years compared to 3.0 years in white KTRs. CONCLUSION: NAKTRs have a decreased prevalence of skin cancer compared to their white counterparts.

Skin Infections due to Bacteria in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Review.

Though there is an abundance of information on cutaneous malignancies in transplant recipients, cutaneous infections in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are underrepresented in the dermatological literature. Our paper provides a comprehensive review of bacterial cutaneous infections within the solid organ transplant population. Cutaneous bacterial infections may lead to significant morbidity and even mortality in this immunosuppressed population. Thus, it is to the benefit of both dermatologists and other transplant care providers to better understand and recognize the features of cutaneous bacterial infections in SOTRs. This paper can aid providers in promptly identifying, diagnosing, and treating bacterial skin infections. This review discusses the diagnosis and treatment of the following bacterial species: Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Nocardia, Mycobacteria, and Bartonella henselae.

Emergency Department Bouncebacks: Is Lack of Primary Care Access the Primary Cause?

BACKGROUND: National emergency department (ED) bounceback rates within 30 days of previous ED discharge have been found to be as high as 26%. We hypothesize that having a primary care physician (PCP) would prevent bouncebacks to the ED because a patient would have a medical resource for follow-up and continued care. METHODS: We performed a prospective, consecutive, anonymous survey study of adult ED patients at a suburban teaching hospital with 88,000 visits annually, from July 5, 2011 through August 8, 2011. Using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests, we compared patients with an initial visit to those returning within 30 days of a previous visit to our ED. RESULTS: We collected 1084 surveys. Those in the bounceback group were more likely to have no insurance (10.2% vs. 4.4%) or Medicaid (17.7% vs. 10.8%) and less likely to have a PCP (79% vs. 86%). Of those with a PCP, 9% in both groups had seen their PCP that day, 58% (initial visit) and 49% (bouncebacks) could have been seen that day, and 35% & 36%, respectively, within 1 week. Of those with a PCP, 38% of initial visits and 32% of bouncebacks stated they had already seen their physician at least once. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that patients who bounce back to the ED might have already contacted their PCP. Although insurance status and the lack thereof predict a higher likelihood to bounce back to the ED, many bouncebacks are insured patients with PCPs able to be seen the same day.