Integrating the six C's of disaster response: Lessons from the mega terrorist attack on October 7, 2023.

On October 7, 2023, over 2,500 Hamas terrorists infiltrated Israel from Gaza and killed over 1,400 people and injured 2,800, resulting in the largest terrorist attack in Israel's history. Several models describe the principles of managing a mass casualty event. One of them is an Australian construct known as the six C's. While command, control, and coordination are familiar concepts, the six C's emphasize the importance of communication and community (consequences and community connection). We describe how two emergency departments in Israel-Assuta Ashdod and the Hadassah Medical Center-Ein Kerem-responded to this disaster in the context of the six C's.

Telemedicine for emergency patient rescue.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article summarizes recent developments in the application of telemedicine, specifically tele-critical care (TCC), toward enhancing patient care during various types of emergencies and patient rescue scenarios when there are limited resources in terms of staff expertise (i.e., knowledge, skills, and abilities), staffing numbers, space, and supplies due to patient location (e.g., a non-ICU bed, the emergency department, a rural hospital) or patient volume as in pandemic surges. RECENT FINDINGS: The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the need for rapidly scalable and agile healthcare delivery systems. During the pandemic, clinicians and hospital systems adopted telemedicine for various applications. Taking advantage of technological improvements in cellular networks and personal mobile devices, and despite the limited outcomes literature to support its use, telemedicine was rapidly adopted to address the fundamental challenge of exposure in outpatient settings, emergency departments, patient follow-up, and home-based monitoring. A critical recognition was that the modality of care (e.g., remote vs. in-person) was less important than access to care, regardless of the patient outcomes. This fundamental shift, facilitated by policies that followed emergency declarations, provided an opportunity to maintain and, in many cases, expand and improve clinical practices and hospital systems by bringing expertise to the patient rather than the patient to the expertise. In addition to using telemedicine to maintain patient access to healthcare, TCC was harnessed to provide local clinicians, forced to manage critically ill patients beyond their normal scope of practice or experience, access to remote expertise (physician, nursing, respiratory therapist, pharmacist). These practices supported decades of literature from the telemedicine community describing the effectiveness of telemedicine in improving patient care and the many challenges defining its value. SUMMARY: In this review, we summarize numerous examples of innovative care delivery systems that have utilized telemedicine, focusing on 'mobile' TCC technology solutions to effectively deliver the best care to the patient regardless of patient location. We emphasize how a 'paradigm of better' can enhance the entirety of the healthcare system.

Fast-Track Training in Emergency Department During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evaluation of a Hybrid Education Model.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) fast track (FT) for the ambulatory, minor injury patient cohort requires rapid patient assessment, treatment, and turnover, yet specific nursing education is limited. The study aimed to test the feasibility and staff satisfaction of an education program to expand nursing skills and knowledge of managing FT patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study, including self-rating surveys and interviews, assessed the pre- and postimplementation of an education program for nurses working in FT in a metropolitan hospital ED in Australia. Hybrid (face-to-face and Teams) education sessions on 10 topics of staff-perceived limited knowledge were delivered over 8 months. RESULTS: Participants demonstrated higher knowledge scores after the implementation of short online education sessions to cover the core facets of minor injury management. Overall staff satisfaction with the program was high. Interview discussions involved three key themes, including "benefits to staff learning," "positive impact on patient care and flow," and "preferred mode of delivery." CONCLUSIIONS: Recorded education sessions on minor injury topics for nurses working in FT have proved effective, and this program has now become a core facet of ED education in our hospital.

Project to improve the management of the head injury patients presenting to the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: At Sandwell General Hospital, there was no risk stratification tool or pathway for head injury (HI) patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This resulted in significant delays in the assessment of HI patients, compromising patient safety and quality of care. AIMS: To employ quality improvement methodology to design an effective adult HI pathway that: ensured >90% of high-risk HI patients being assessed by ED clinicians within 15 min of arrival, reduce CT turnaround times, and aiming to keep the final decision making <4 hours. METHODS: SWOT analysis was performed; driver diagrams were used to set out the aims and objectives. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle was used to facilitate the change and monitor the outcomes. Process map was designed to identify the areas for improvement. A new HI pathway was introduced, imaging and transporting the patients was modified, and early decisions were made to meet the standards. RESULTS: Data were collected and monitored following the interventions. The new pathway improved the proportion of patients assessed by the ED doctors within 15 min from 31% to 63%. The average time to CT head scan was decreased from 69 min to 53 min. Average CT scan reporting time also improved from 98 min to 71 min. Overall, the average time to decision for admission or discharge decreased from 6 hours 48 min to 4 hours 24 min. CONCLUSIONS: Following implementation of the new HI pathway, an improvement in the patient safety and quality of care was noted. High-risk HI patients were picked up earlier, assessed quicker and had CT head scans performed sooner. Decision time for admission/discharge was improved. The HI pathway continues to be used and will be reviewed and re-audited between 3 and 6 months to ensure the sustained improvement.

Use of Reverse Shock Index Multiplied by Simplified Motor Score in a Five-Level Triage System: Identifying Trauma in Adult Patients at a High Risk of Mortality.

Background and Objectives: The Taiwan Triage and Acuity Scale (TTAS) is reliable for triaging patients in emergency departments in Taiwan; however, most triage decisions are still based on chief complaints. The reverse-shock index (SI) multiplied by the simplified motor score (rSI-sMS) is a more comprehensive approach to triage that combines the SI and a modified consciousness assessment. We investigated the combination of the TTAS and rSI-sMS for triage compared with either parameter alone as well as the SI and modified SI. Materials and Methods: We analyzed 13,144 patients with trauma from the Taipei Tzu Chi Trauma Database. We investigated the prioritization performance of the TTAS, rSI-sMS, and their combination. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the trends in all clinical outcomes for different rSI-sMS values. The sensitivity and specificity of rSI-sMS were investigated at a cutoff value of 4 (based on previous study and the highest score of the Youden Index) in predicting injury severity clinical outcomes under the TTAS system were also investigated. Results: Compared with patients in triage level III, those in triage levels I and II had higher odds ratios for major injury (as indicated by revised trauma score < 7 and injury severity score [ISS] ≥ 16), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, prolonged ICU stay (≥14 days), prolonged hospital stay (≥30 days), and mortality. In all three triage levels, the rSI-sMS < 4 group had severe injury and worse outcomes than the rSI-sMS ≥ 4 group. The TTAS and rSI-sMS had higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) for mortality, ICU admission, prolonged ICU stay, and prolonged hospital stay than the SI and modified SI. The combination of the TTAS and rSI-sMS had the highest AUROC for all clinical outcomes. The prediction performance of rSI-sMS < 4 for major injury (ISS ≥ 16) exhibited 81.49% specificity in triage levels I and II and 87.6% specificity in triage level III. The specificity for mortality was 79.2% in triage levels I and II and 87.4% in triage level III. Conclusions: The combination of rSI-sMS and the TTAS yielded superior prioritization performance to TTAS alone. The integration of rSI-sMS and TTAS effectively enhances the efficiency and accuracy of identifying trauma patients at a high risk of mortality.

Programme theories to describe how different general practitioner service models work in different contexts in or alongside emergency departments (GP-ED): realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Addressing increasing patient demand and improving ED patient flow is a key ambition for NHS England. Delivering general practitioner (GP) services in or alongside EDs (GP-ED) was advocated in 2017 for this reason, supported by £100 million (US$130 million) of capital funding. Current evidence shows no overall improvement in addressing demand and reducing waiting times, but considerable variation in how different service models operate, subject to local context. METHODS: We conducted mixed-methods analysis using inductive and deductive approaches for qualitative (observations, interviews) and quantitative data (time series analyses of attendances, reattendances, hospital admissions, length of stay) based on previous research using a purposive sample of 13 GP-ED service models (3 inside-integrated, 4 inside-parallel service, 3 outside-onsite and 3 with no GPs) in England and Wales. We used realist methodology to understand the relationship between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes to develop programme theories about how and why different GP-ED service models work. RESULTS: GP-ED service models are complex, with variation in scope and scale of the service, influenced by individual, departmental and external factors. Quantitative data were of variable quality: overall, no reduction in attendances and waiting times, a mixed picture for hospital admissions and length of hospital stay. Our programme theories describe how the GP-ED service models operate: inside the ED, integrated with patient flow and general ED demand, with a wider GP role than usual primary care; outside the ED, addressing primary care demand with an experienced streaming nurse facilitating the 'right patients' are streamed to the GP; or within the ED as a parallel service with most variability in the level of integration and GP role. CONCLUSION: GP-ED services are complex . Our programme theories inform recommendations on how services could be modified in particular contexts to address local demand, or whether alternative healthcare services should be considered.

Bypassing the Brick-and-Mortar Hospital: Increasing Direct Admissions from the Emergency Department to Inpatient Hospital-at-Home.

Home hospital programs continue to grow across the United States. There are limited studies around the process of patient selection and successful acquisition from the emergency department. The article describes how an interdisciplinary team used quality improvement methodology to significantly increase the number of admissions directly from the emergency department to the Advanced Care at Home program.

Evaluation of different models of general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments: a mixed-methods realist evaluation.

Background: Emergency healthcare services are under intense pressure to meet increasing patient demands. Many patients presenting to emergency departments could be managed by general practitioners in general practitioner-emergency department service models. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, patient experience and system implications of the different general practitioner-emergency department models. Design: Mixed-methods realist evaluation. Methods: Phase 1 (2017-8), to understand current practice: rapid realist literature review, national survey and follow-up key informant interviews, national stakeholder event and safety data analysis. Phase 2 (2018-21), to collect and analyse qualitative (observations, interviews) and quantitative data (time series analysis); cost-consequences analysis of routine data; and case site data for 'marker condition' analysis from a purposive sample of 13 case sites in England and Wales. Phase 3 (2021-2), to conduct mixed-methods analysis for programme theory and toolkit development. Results: General practitioners commonly work in emergency departments, but delivery models vary widely in terms of the scope of the general practitioner role and the scale of the general practitioner service. We developed a taxonomy to describe general practitioner-emergency department service models (Integrated with the emergency department service, Parallel within the emergency department, Outside the emergency department on the hospital site) and present a programme theory as principal output of the study to describe how these service models were observed to operate. Routine data were of variable quality, limiting our analysis. Time series analysis demonstrated trends across intervention sites for: increased time spent in the emergency department; increased emergency department attendances and reattendances; and mixed results for hospital admissions. Evidence on patient experience was limited but broadly supportive; we identified department-level processes to optimise the safety of general practitioner-emergency department models. Limitations: The quality, heterogeneity and extent of routine emergency department data collection during the study period limited the conclusions. Recruitment was limited by criteria for case sites (time series requirements) and individual patients (with 'marker conditions'). Pandemic and other pressures limited data collection for marker condition analysis. Data collected and analysed were pre pandemic; new approaches such as 'telephone first' and their relevance to our findings remains unexplored. Conclusion: Findings suggest that general practitioner-emergency department service models do not meet the aim of reducing the overall emergency department waiting times and improving patient flow with limited evidence of cost savings. Qualitative data indicated that general practitioners were often valued as members of the wider emergency department team. We have developed a toolkit, based on our findings, to provide guidance for implementing and delivering general practitioner-emergency department services. Future work: The emergency care data set has since been introduced across England to help standardise data collection to facilitate further research. We would advocate the systematic capture of patient experience measures and patient-reported outcome measures as part of routine care. More could be done to support the development of the general practitioner in emergency department role, including a core set of competencies and governance structure, to reflect the different general practitioner-emergency department models and to evaluate the effectiveness and cost effectiveness to guide future policy. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017069741. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/145/04) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 10. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Hospital emergency departments are under huge pressure. Patients are waiting many hours to be seen, some with problems that general practitioners could deal with. To reduce waiting times and improve patient care, arrangements have been put in place for general practitioners to work in or alongside emergency departments (general practitioner­emergency department models). We studied the different ways of working to find out what works well, how and for whom. We brought together a lot of information. We reviewed existing evidence, sent out surveys to 184 emergency departments, spent time in the emergency departments observing how they operated and interviewing 106 staff in 13 hospitals and 24 patients who visited those emergency departments. We also looked at statistical information recorded by hospitals. Two public contributors were involved from the beginning, and we held two stakeholder events to ensure the relevance of our research to professionals and patients. Getting reliable figures to compare the various general practitioner­emergency department set-ups (inside, parallel to or outside the emergency department) was difficult. Our findings suggest that over time more people are coming to emergency departments and overall waiting times did not generally improve due to general practitioner­emergency department models. Evidence that general practitioners might admit fewer patients to hospital was mixed, with limited findings of cost savings. Patients were generally supportive of the care they received, although we could not speak to as many patients as we planned. The skills and experience of general practitioners were often valued as members of the wider emergency department team. We identified how the care provided was kept safe with: strong leaders, good communication between different types of staff, highly trained and experienced nurses responsible for streaming and specific training for general practitioners on how they were expected to work. We have produced a guide to help professionals develop and improve general practitioner­emergency department services and we have written easy-to-read summaries of all the articles we published.

Boarding in the emergency department: challenges and mitigation strategies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Herein, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand the issue of prolonged emergency department (ED) boarding by providing an overview of the current evidence on the available causes, consequences, and mitigation strategies. RECENT FINDINGS: Severely ill patients awaiting transfer to intensive care units (ICU) imposes additional burdens on the emergency care team from both a clinical and management perspective. The reasons for prolonged ED boarding are multifactorial. ED boarding compromises patients' safety and outcomes, and is associated with increased team burnout and dissatisfaction. Mitigation strategies include the optimization of patients' flow, the establishment of resuscitative care units, deployment of mobile critical care teams, and improvements in training. Staffing adjustments, changes in hospital operations, and quality improvement initiatives are required to improve this situation, while active bed management and implementation of capacity command centers may also help. SUMMARY: Considering the characteristics of healthcare systems, such as funding mechanisms, organizational structures, delivery models, access and quality of care, the challenge of ED boarding of critically ill patients requires a nuanced and adaptable approach. Solutions are complex but must involve the entirety of the hospital system, emergency department, staff adjustment, and education.

Patient flow in emergency departments: a comprehensive umbrella review of solutions and challenges across the health system.

BACKGROUND: Globally, emergency departments (EDs) are overcrowded and unable to meet an ever-increasing demand for care. The aim of this study is to comprehensively review and synthesise literature on potential solutions and challenges throughout the entire health system, focusing on ED patient flow. METHODS: An umbrella review was conducted to comprehensively summarise and synthesise the available evidence from multiple research syntheses. A comprehensive search strategy was employed in four databases alongside government or organisational websites in March 2023. Gray literature and reports were also searched. Quality was assessed using the JBI critical appraisal checklist for systematic reviews and research syntheses. We summarised and classified findings using qualitative synthesis, the Population-Capacity-Process (PCP) model, and the input/throughput/output (I/T/O) model of ED patient flow and synthesised intervention outcomes based on the Quadruple Aim framework. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 1263 articles, of which 39 were included in the umbrella review. Patient flow interventions were categorised into human factors, management-organisation interventions, and infrastructure and mapped to the relevant component of the patient journey from pre-ED to post-ED interventions. Most interventions had mixed or quadruple nonsignificant outcomes. The majority of interventions for enhancing ED patient flow were primarily related to the 'within-ED' phase of the patient journey. Fewer interventions were identified for the 'post-ED' phase (acute inpatient transfer, subacute inpatient transfer, hospital at home, discharge home, or residential care) and the 'pre-ED' phase. The intervention outcomes were aligned with the aim (QAIM), which aims to improve patient care experience, enhance population health, optimise efficiency, and enhance staff satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that there was a wide range of interventions used to address patient flow, but the effectiveness of these interventions varied, and most interventions were focused on the ED. Interventions for the remainder of the patient journey were largely neglected. The metrics reported were mainly focused on efficiency measures rather than addressing all quadrants of the quadruple aim. Further research is needed to investigate and enhance the effectiveness of interventions outside the ED in improving ED patient flow. It is essential to develop interventions that relate to all three phases of patient flow: pre-ED, within-ED, and post-ED.

Artificial intelligence to advance acute and intensive care medicine.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores recent key advancements in artificial intelligence for acute and intensive care medicine. As artificial intelligence rapidly evolves, this review aims to elucidate its current applications, future possibilities, and the vital challenges that are associated with its integration into emergency medical dispatch, triage, medical consultation and ICUs. RECENT FINDINGS: The integration of artificial intelligence in emergency medical dispatch (EMD) facilitates swift and accurate assessment. In the emergency department (ED), artificial intelligence driven triage models leverage diverse patient data for improved outcome predictions, surpassing human performance in retrospective studies. Artificial intelligence can streamline medical documentation in the ED and enhances medical imaging interpretation. The introduction of large multimodal generative models showcases the future potential to process varied biomedical data for comprehensive decision support. In the ICU, artificial intelligence applications range from early warning systems to treatment suggestions. SUMMARY: Despite promising academic strides, widespread artificial intelligence adoption in acute and critical care is hindered by ethical, legal, technical, organizational, and validation challenges. Despite these obstacles, artificial intelligence's potential to streamline clinical workflows is evident. When these barriers are overcome, future advancements in artificial intelligence have the potential to transform the landscape of patient care for acute and intensive care medicine.

Safety planning intervention and follow-up: A telehealth service model for suicidal individuals in emergency department settings: Study design and protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Safety Planning Intervention with follow-up services (SPI+) is a promising suicide prevention intervention, yet many Emergency Departments (EDs) lack the resources for adequate implementation. Comprehensive strategies addressing structural and organizational barriers are needed to optimize SPI+ implementation and scale-up. This protocol describes a test of one strategy in which ED staff connect at-risk patients to expert clinicians from a Suicide Prevention Consultation Center (SPCC) via telehealth. METHOD: This stepped wedge, cluster-randomized trial compares the effectiveness, implementation, cost, and cost offsets of SPI+ delivered by SPCC clinicians versus ED-based clinicians (enhanced usual care; EUC). Eight EDs will start with EUC and cross over to the SPCC phase. Blocks of two EDs will be randomly assigned to start dates 3 months apart. Approximately 13,320 adults discharged following a suicide-related ED visit will be included; EUC and SPCC samples will comprise patients from before and after SPCC crossover, respectively. Effectiveness data sources are electronic health records, administrative claims, and the National Death Index. Primary effectiveness outcomes are presence of suicidal behavior and number/type of mental healthcare visits and secondary outcomes include number/type of suicide-related acute services 6-months post-discharge. We will use the same data sources to assess cost offsets to gauge SPCC scalability and sustainability. We will examine preliminary implementation outcomes (reach, adoption, fidelity, acceptability, and feasibility) through patient, clinician, and health-system leader interviews and surveys. CONCLUSION: If the SPCC demonstrates clinical effectiveness and health system cost reduction, it may be a scalable model for evidence-based suicide prevention in the ED.

Navigating Transitions in Oncology Care: From Emergency Department to Outpatient Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: This quality improvement project was a collaborative effort with Penn Medicine's emergency department (ED) and oncology nurse navigators (ONNs). The goal of the project was to streamline patient transitions from the ED to the outpatient oncology clinic by developing a standardized referral process. The main objectives were to simplify and automate the referral process using the electronic medical record, improve multidisciplinary communication across the care continuum, ensure timely follow-up, and address barriers to oncology care. METHODS: The ED providers placed a consult to ONNs. The ONNs reached out to the patient within 48 hours of the consult. They maintained a database of patient referrals and collected information such as patient demographics, reason for referral, insurance, and patient outcomes. RESULTS: The ED providers referred 204 patients to the ONNs from April 2022 to September 2023. The development of a standardized referral process from the ED to the outpatient oncology clinic proved successful. Of the patients referred, the ONNs facilitated 98 cancer diagnoses and 80 of those patients are receiving oncology care at Penn Medicine. The median time to the patient's first appointments was seven days, diagnosis was 15 days, and treatment initiation occurred within 32 days. CONCLUSION: The project team achieved their goal of facilitating timely access to oncology care, ensuring continuity, and addressing patient-specific barriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: This quality improvement initiative highlights the ONNs' role in enhancing access and equity in cancer care delivery. The success of the project underscores the ONN's expertise and leadership in addressing healthcare disparities in oncology care. Collaboratively, the teams created a new referral workflow improving care transitions from the ED to the outpatient oncology clinic. The project sets a precedent for optimizing patient care transitions, demonstrating the positive impact of ONNs as key members of the multidisciplinary healthcare team.

Involving the Patient and Family in the Transfer of Information at Shift Change in a Pediatric Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: The transfer of information at the change of shift is a critical point for patient experience during the care process. The aim of this study was to evaluate caregivers' perceptions before and after the implementation of a multidisciplinary bedside handoff in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: This was a quality improvement pre-post intervention, single-center study. The authors included caregivers of patients allocated in the observation unit of a PED during health care provider shift change. The study was made up of the following phases: (1) preintervention survey distribution, (2) implementation of the bedside handoff, involving all health care professionals (including nurses, nursing assistants, and pediatricians) and caregivers, and (3) postintervention survey distribution. The survey explored the three dimensions of patient experience defined as main study outcomes: information received and communication with professionals, participation, and continuity of care. RESULTS: A total of 102 surveys were collected (51 each in the preintervention and postintervention phases). In the preintervention phase, 94.1% of caregivers would have wished to be actively involved in the change of shift. In the postintervention phase, more caregivers felt that professionals had proper introductions (49.0% vs. 84.3%; p < 0.01), had kept them informed of the plan to be followed (58.8% vs. 84.3%; p = 0.02), and encouraged questions (45.1% vs. 82.4%; p < 0.01). Caregivers of the postintervention phase perceived less disorganization during the change of shift (25.5% vs. 5.9%; p = 0.01) and a greater sense of continuity (64.7% vs. 86.3%; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The bedside handoff is a useful strategy to improve patient and family perceptions of communication with professionals, information received, and continuity of care at health care providers shift change. Future lines of research and improvement include ensuring equity in participation in the bedside handoff for all caregivers, monitoring the handoffs to determine how often patients/caregivers participate and correct mistakes in information transfer. and exploring professionals' perceptions.

Improving Outcomes in Patients Sent to the Emergency Department from Outpatient Providers: A Receiver-Driven Handoff Process Improvement.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient providers refer to emergency departments (EDs) due to findings requiring assessment beyond existing capabilities. However, poor communication surrounding these transitions may hinder safety and timeliness of emergency care. Receiver-driven handoff (RDH) is a process that helps ensure that all pertinent information is shared. This quality improvement project aimed to (1) improve knowledge of RDH, (2) increase satisfaction and perceptions surrounding RDH, (3) modify behaviors in relation to RDH, and (4) decrease referred patients leaving without being seen (LWBS). METHODS: The Iowa Model and Implementation Framework guided this evidence-based quality improvement project. A multidisciplinary team developed and implemented a standardized RDH process consisting of screening to determine whether a patient was referred to the ED, review of electronic health record (EHR), and use of EHR documentation. Process measures were collected via questionnaire pre- and postimplementation and were analyzed quantitatively. Outcome measures were trended by a statistical process control p-chart, which was developed to demonstrate changes in the percentage of patients who were referred to the ED from the outpatient setting and LWBS. RESULTS: The average response for the question "How satisfied are you with the handoff of patient information from referring clinic providers to the ED?" increased from 1.51 preintervention to 2.04 postintervention (p = 0.005). Respondents rated the information received during handoff higher postintervention (2.12 vs. 2.52, p = 0.04). Compliance with screening for referral to the ED was 84.0%. The proportion of patients LWBS after referral decreased by 6.2 percentage points (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Using RDH in conjunction with a standardized triage screening may improve quality of information shared during this vulnerable transition and may assist in reduction of referred patients LWBS. The RDH process should be adapted into everyday workflow to ensure sustainability and effectiveness.

Refining a Framework to Enhance Communication in the Emergency Department During the Diagnostic Process: An eDelphi Approach.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) are susceptible to diagnostic error. Suboptimal communication between the patient and the interdisciplinary care team increases risk to diagnostic safety. The role of communication remains underrepresented in existing diagnostic decision-making conceptual models. METHODS: The authors used eDelphi methodology, whereby data are collected electronically, to achieve consensus among an expert panel of 18 clinicians, patients, family members, and other participants on a refined ED-based diagnostic decision-making framework that integrates several potential opportunities for communication to enhance diagnostic quality. This study examined the entire diagnostic process in the ED, from prehospital to discharge or transfer to inpatient care, and identified where communication breakdowns could occur. After four iterative rounds of the eDelphi process, including a final validation round by all participants, the project's a priori consensus threshold of 80% agreement was reached. RESULTS: The authors developed a final framework that positions communication more prominently in the diagnostic process in the ED and enhances the original National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) and ED-adapted NASEM frameworks. Specific points in the ED journey were identified where more attention to communication might be helpful. Two specific types of communication-information exchange and shared understanding-were identified as high priority for optimal outcomes. Ideas for communication-focused interventions to prevent diagnostic error in the ED fell into three categories: patient-facing, clinician-facing, and system-facing interventions. CONCLUSION: This project's refinement of the NASEM framework adapted to the ED can be used to develop communications-focused interventions to reduce diagnostic error in this highly complex and error-prone setting.