Formative evaluation of an emergency department clinical decision support system for agitation symptoms: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The burden of mental health-related visits to emergency departments (EDs) is growing, and agitation episodes are prevalent with such visits. Best practice guidance from experts recommends early assessment of at-risk populations and pre-emptive intervention using de-escalation techniques to prevent agitation. Time pressure, fluctuating work demands, and other systems-related factors pose challenges to efficient decision-making and adoption of best practice recommendations during an unfolding behavioural crisis. As such, we propose to design, develop and evaluate a computerised clinical decision support (CDS) system, Early Detection and Treatment to Reduce Events with Agitation Tool (ED-TREAT). We aim to identify patients at risk of agitation and guide ED clinicians through appropriate risk assessment and timely interventions to prevent agitation with a goal of minimising restraint use and improving patient experience and outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study describes the formative evaluation of the health record embedded CDS tool. Under aim 1, the study will collect qualitative data to design and develop ED-TREAT using a contextual design approach and an iterative user-centred design process. Participants will include potential CDS users, that is, ED physicians, nurses, technicians, as well as patients with lived experience of restraint use for behavioural crisis management during an ED visit. We will use purposive sampling to ensure the full spectrum of perspectives until we reach thematic saturation. Next, under aim 2, the study will conduct a pilot, randomised controlled trial of ED-TREAT at two adult ED sites in a regional health system in the Northeast USA to evaluate the feasibility, fidelity and bedside acceptability of ED-TREAT. We aim to recruit a total of at least 26 eligible subjects under the pilot trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval by the Yale University Human Investigation Committee was obtained in 2021 (HIC# 2000030893 and 2000030906). All participants will provide informed verbal consent prior to being enrolled in the study. Results will be disseminated through publications in open-access, peer-reviewed journals, via scientific presentations or through direct email notifications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04959279; Pre-results.

Acute pain pathways: protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid analgesics are often used to treat moderate-to-severe acute non-cancer pain; however, there is little high-quality evidence to guide clinician prescribing. An essential element to developing evidence-based guidelines is a better understanding of pain management and pain control among individuals experiencing acute pain for various common diagnoses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre prospective observational study will recruit 1550 opioid-naïve participants with acute pain seen in diverse clinical settings including primary/urgent care, emergency departments and dental clinics. Participants will be followed for 6 months with the aid of a patient-centred health data aggregating platform that consolidates data from study questionnaires, electronic health record data on healthcare services received, prescription fill data from pharmacies, and activity and sleep data from a Fitbit activity tracker. Participants will be enrolled to represent diverse races and ethnicities and pain conditions, as well as geographical diversity. Data analysis will focus on assessing patients' patterns of pain and opioid analgesic use, along with other pain treatments; associations between patient and condition characteristics and patient-centred outcomes including resolution of pain, satisfaction with care and long-term use of opioid analgesics; and descriptive analyses of patient management of leftover opioids. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received approval from IRBs at each site. Results will be made available to participants, funders, the research community and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04509115.

A qualitative system dynamics model for effects of workplace violence and clinician burnout on agitation management in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Over 1.7 million episodes of agitation occur annually across the United States in emergency departments (EDs), some of which lead to workplace assaults on clinicians and require invasive methods like physical restraints to maintain staff and patient safety. Recent studies demonstrated that experiences of workplace violence contribute to symptoms of burnout, which may impact future decisions regarding use of physical restraints on agitated patients. To capture the dynamic interactions between clinicians and agitated patients under their care, we applied qualitative system dynamics methods to develop a model that describes feedback mechanisms of clinician burnout and the use of physical restraints to manage agitation. METHODS: We convened an interprofessional panel of clinician stakeholders and agitation experts for a series of model building sessions to develop the current model. The panel derived the final version of our model over ten sessions of iterative refinement and modification, each lasting approximately three to four hours. We incorporated findings from prior studies on agitation and burnout related to workplace violence, identifying interpersonal and psychological factors likely to influence our outcomes of interest to form the basis of our model. RESULTS: The final model resulted in five main sets of feedback loops that describe key narratives regarding the relationship between clinician burnout and agitated patients becoming physically restrained: (1) use of restraints decreases agitation and risk of assault, leading to increased perceptions of safety and decreasing use of restraints in a balancing feedback loop which stabilizes the system; (2) clinician stress leads to a perception of decreased safety and lower threshold to restrain, causing more stress in a negatively reinforcing loop; (3) clinician burnout leads to a decreased perception of colleague support which leads to more burnout in a negatively reinforcing loop; (4) clinician burnout leads to negative perceptions of patient intent during agitation, thus lowering threshold to restrain and leading to higher task load, more likelihood of workplace assaults, and higher burnout in a negatively reinforcing loop; and (5) mutual trust between clinicians causes increased perceptions of safety and improved team control, leading to decreased clinician stress and further increased mutual trust in a positively reinforcing loop. CONCLUSIONS: Our system dynamics approach led to the development of a robust qualitative model that illustrates a number of important feedback cycles that underly the relationships between clinician experiences of workplace violence, stress and burnout, and impact on decisions to physically restrain agitated patients. This work identifies potential opportunities at multiple targets to break negatively reinforcing cycles and support positive influences on safety for both clinicians and patients in the face of physical danger.

Assessing the impact of the Good Samaritan Law in the state of Connecticut: a system dynamics approach.

BACKGROUND: Although Good Samaritan laws (GSLs) have been widely adopted throughout the United States, their efficacy in individual states is often unknown. This paper offers an approach for assessing the impact of GSLs and insight for policy-makers and public health officials who wish to know whether they should expect to see outcomes from similar policy interventions. METHODS: Utilizing a system dynamics (SD) modeling approach, the research team conducted a policy evaluation to determine the impact of GSLs on opioid use disorder (OUD) in Connecticut and evaluated the GSL based upon the following health outcomes: (1) emergency department (ED) visits for overdose, (2) behavioral changes of bystanders, and (3) overdose deaths. RESULTS: The simulation model suggests that Connecticut's GSL has not yet affected overdose deaths but has resulted in bystander behavioral changes, such as increased 911 calls for overdose. ED visits have increased as the number of opioid users has increased. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation results indicate that the number of opioid-related deaths will continue to increase and that the GSL alone cannot effectively control the crisis. However, the SD approach that was used will allow policymakers to evaluate the effectiveness of the GSL over time using a simulation framework. This SD model demonstrates great potential by producing simulations that allow policymakers to assess multiple strategies for combating the opioid crisis and select optimal public health interventions.

Identification of Hospitals That Care for a High Proportion of Patients With Social Risk Factors.

Importance: Hospitals can face significant clinical and financial challenges in caring for patients with social risk factors. Currently the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program stratifies hospitals by proportion of patients eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid when calculating payment penalties to account for the patient population. However, additional social risk factors should be considered. Objective: To evaluate 7 different definitions of social risk and understand the degree to which differing definitions identify the same hospitals caring for a high proportion of patients with social risk factors. Design Setting and Participants: Across 18 publicly reported Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) hospital performance measures, highly disadvantaged hospitals were identified by the the proportion of patients with social risk factors using the following 7 commonly used definitions of social risk: living below the US poverty line, educational attainment of less than high school, unemployment, living in a crowded household, African American race (as a proxy for the social risk factor of exposure to racism), Medicaid coverage, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality index of socioeconomic status score. In this cross-sectional study, social risk factors were evaluated by measure because hospitals may serve a disadvantaged patient population for one measure but not another. Data were collected from April 1, 2014, to June 30, 2017, and analyzed from July 25, 2019, to April 25, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of hospitals identified as caring for patients with social risk factors using 7 definitions of social risk, across 18 publicly reported CMS hospital performance measures. Results: Among 4465 hospitals, a mean of 31.0% (range, 28.9%-32.3%) were identified at least once when using the 7 definitions of social risk as caring for a high proportion of patients with social risk factors. Among all hospitals meeting at least 1 definition of social risk, a mean of 0.7% (range, 0%-1.0%) were identified as highly disadvantaged by all 7 definitions. Among hospitals meeting at least 1 definition of social risk, a mean of 2.7% (range, 1.3%-5.1%) were identified by 6 definitions; 6.5% (range, 5.9%-7.1%), by 5 definitions; 10.4% (range, 9.5%-12.1%), by 4 definitions; 13.2% (range, 10.1%-14.4%), by 3 definitions; 21.4% (range, 20.1%-22.4%), by 2 definitions; and 45.2% (range, 42.6%-47.1%), by only 1 definition. This pattern was consistent across all 18 performance measures. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, there were inconsistencies in the identification of hospitals caring for disadvantaged populations using different definitions of social risk factors. Without consensus on how to define disadvantaged hospitals, policies to support such hospitals may be applied inconsistently.

Acute airway compromise from a hemorrhagic posterior cervical-mediastinal mass: Rare presentation of a parathyroid adenoma.

Massive hemorrhage secondary to rupture of a parathyroid adenoma is exceedingly rare. We present the case of a hemorrhagic parathyroid adenoma resulting in airway compromise treated with surgical decompression.

Improving transition from pediatric to adult cystic fibrosis care: lessons from a national survey of current practices.

OBJECTIVES: More than 500,000 adolescents with special health care needs age into adulthood each year in the United States, and there is growing recognition of the need for support of their transition to adult-oriented health care. Because of improved survival, cystic fibrosis has experienced this increasing transition need, and cystic fibrosis policy leaders responded by mandating the transition of adults with cystic fibrosis to adult-focused cystic fibrosis care programs by 2000. The primary objective of this study was to characterize in detail recent transition practices at US cystic fibrosis programs, to identify areas for improvement and to serve as a model for other diseases. A secondary objective of this study was to develop and validate a survey for formal assessment of transition practices. METHODS: A 105-question survey on key aspects of transition was administered to cystic fibrosis care team members from all 195 US Cystic Fibrosis Care programs. Rates of adherence to recommended components of transition care were measured. RESULTS: A total of 448 surveys were obtained from 170 (87%) of 195 cystic fibrosis programs. Although transfer of care occurs at a median age of 19 years, initial discussion of transition does not occur until a median age of 17 years, limiting time to foster self-care skills. Only half of programs consistently perform a transition readiness assessment, 28% of centers offer visits focused on transition, and <10% have a written list of desirable self-management skills. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in transition support provided to young adults with cystic fibrosis, but there are simple steps that may lead to more consistent delivery of transition services. Methods of assessment and lessons learned from transitioning young adults at US cystic fibrosis programs may serve to improve transition for individuals with other childhood diseases.