Is boarding compromising our residents' education? A national survey of emergency medicine program directors.

Background: Boarding patients in the emergency department (ED) potentially affects resident education. Program director (PD) perceptions of the impact of boarding on their trainees have not been previously described. Methods: We surveyed a cross-sectional convenience sample of emergency medicine PDs using a mixed-methods approach to explore their perceptions of how boarding has affected their residents' training. Descriptive data were reported as percentages and differences were calculated using Pearson's chi-square test, with p < 0.05 considered significant. A framework model was used to qualitatively analyze free-text responses. Results: A total of 170 responses were collected, for a response rate of 63%. Most respondents felt that boarding had at least some effect on resident education with 29%, 35%, 18%, and 12% noting "a little," "a moderate amount," "a lot," and "a great deal," respectively, and 5% noting "no effect at all." Respondents perceived a negative impact of boarding on resident education and training, with 80% reporting a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" effect, 18% feeling neutral, and 2% noting a "somewhat positive" effect. Most noted a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" effect on resident education in managing ED throughput (70%) and high patient volumes (66%). Fifty-four percent noted a "somewhat" or "extremely negative" impact on being involved in the initial workup of undifferentiated patients. Thirty-two percent saw a "somewhat" or "extremely positive" effect on learning the management of critically ill patients. Qualitative analysis of challenges, mitigation strategies, and resident feedback emphasized the lack of exposure to managing departmental patient flow, impact on bedside teaching, and need for flexibility in resident staffing. Conclusions: Most PDs agree that boarding negatively affects resident education and identify several strategies to mitigate the impact. These findings can help inform future interventions to optimize resident learning in the complex educational landscape of high ED boarding.

A quality improvement approach to integrating social determinants of health objectives into pediatric simulation.

Background: Health disparities and the unequal distribution of social resources impact health outcomes. By considering social determinants of health (SDH), clinicians can provide holistic and equitable care. However, barriers such as lack of time or understanding of the relevance of SDH to patient care prevent providers from addressing SDH. Simulation curricula may improve learners' ability to address SDH in practice. Objectives: The primary objective was to increase the percentage of pediatric emergency simulations that included SDH objectives from 5% to 50% in 12 months at one institution. As a balancing metric, we examined whether trainees approved the incorporation of SDH objectives. Methods: Using the Model for Improvement approach, we conducted interviews of residents and simulation facilitators to identify challenges to integrating SDH objectives into the simulation curriculum. Review of interviews and visual representation of the system helped identify key drivers in the process. A team of simulation leaders, residents, and fellows met regularly to develop simulation cases with embedded SDH objectives. Using a plan, do, study, act approach, we tested, refined, and implemented interventions including engaging residency program and SDH leadership, piloting cases, providing facilitators concise resources, inviting SDH-specific experts to co-debrief, and eliciting and incorporating learner and facilitator feedback to improve cases. SDH topics include homelessness, undocumented status, and racism. Results: Prior to the start of the quality improvement work, SDH were rarely incorporated into emergency simulations for pediatric residents. A p-chart was used to track the percentage of monthly cases that incorporated SDH topics. During the study period, the percentage of simulations including SDH topics increased to 57% per month. Most trainees (94%) welcomed incorporating SDH objectives. Conclusions: Using the Model for Improvement, we incorporated SDH objectives into pediatric resident emergency simulations. Next steps include examining effectiveness of the curriculum, dissemination to additional learners, and examining sustainability in practice.

Representation of patients with non-English language preferences in motor vehicle collision trauma and emergency medicine research.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with non-English language preferences (NELP) represent a growing proportion of the USA population. Prior studies demonstrate disparate health outcomes related to NELP status; however, this patient population is often excluded from medical research. There is a paucity of literature describing the impact of NELP status on trauma, specifically injury and outcomes related to vehicle occupants injured during motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). The goal of this study was to evaluate the representation of patients with NELP in both emergency medicine and trauma literature. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of US-based publications from 2010 to 2021. Titles, abstracts and full texts of eligible articles were evaluated. Data were extracted using an a priori determined standardised reporting tool to evaluate language as study inclusion/exclusion criteria, manuscript reporting of language, assessment of language as a primary variable and consideration of language in study methodology. RESULTS: A total of 82 studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies (28%) excluded NELP populations and only one study explicitly included the NELP population. None of the studies evaluated language as a primary outcome of the study or included language as a variable in the analysis. Over half of the studies (53.6%) used a public data set or registry. CONCLUSION: NELP populations are routinely excluded from and are difficult to identify in MVC trauma research. Without appropriate inclusion and identification, it will be difficult to understand the prevalence and outcomes of traumatic injury in NELP patients and to develop culturally and linguistically appropriate interventions.

Emergency department visits in Connecticut for survivors of sexual assault before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care for survivors of sexual assault in three urban Emergency Departments (ED) in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who presented after sexual assault to three EDs during 6-month intervals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We excluded individuals <18 years old. We performed a structured chart review to ascertain demographics, ED treatments, and adherence to guidelines for care of sexual assault survivors. RESULTS: Of 105 patients who received care after a sexual assault, 57 presented during the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority were female, White/Caucasian, and presented within 120 h of sexual assault. There was an increase in ED presentations for sexual assault during the pandemic. While there was no difference in medical care, there were fewer sexual assault advocates called during the pandemic. In addition, there was an increase in non-White survivors in the first 3 months of the pandemic that did not remain at 6 months. CONCLUSION: The care of survivors in the ED was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. While medical care remained similar, fewer calls to sexual assault advocates, a key component of ED and long-term care of survivors, demonstrate a disruption in their care.

Limited English Proficiency as a Barrier to Inclusion in Emergency Medicine-Based Clinical Stroke Research.

AIMS: Individuals with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) represent a growing percentage of the U.S. population yet face inequities in health outcomes and barriers to routine care. Despite these disparities, LEP populations are often excluded from clinical research studies. The aim of this study was to assess for the inclusion of LEP populations in published acute care stroke research in the U.S. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of publications from three databases using acute care and stroke specific Medical Subject Heading key terms. The primary outcome was whether language was used as inclusion or exclusion criteria for study participation and the secondary outcome was whether the study explored outcomes by language. RESULTS: A total of 167 studies were included. Twenty-two studies (13.2%) indicated the use of language as inclusion/exclusion criteria within the manuscript or dataset/registry and only 17 studies (10.2%) explicitly included LEP patients either in the study or dataset/registry. Only four papers (2%) include language as a primary variable. CONCLUSIONS: As LEP populations are not routinely incorporated in acute care stroke research, it is critical that researchers engage in language-inclusive research practices to ensure all patients are equitably represented in research studies and ultimately evidence-based practices.