Documentation from trained medical students has a low rate of relative downcoding for emergency medicine encounters.

Background: Since 2018, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines have allowed teaching physicians to bill for evaluation and management services based on medical student documentation. Limited previous data suggest that medical student documentation suffers from a high rate of downcoding relative to faculty documentation. We sought to compare the coding outcomes of documentation performed by medical students, and not edited by faculty, with documentation edited and submitted by faculty. Methods: A total of 104 randomly selected notes from real patient encounters written by senior medical students were compared to the revised notes submitted by faculty. The note pairs were then split and reviewed by blinded professional coders and assigned level of service (LoS) codes 1-5 (corresponding to E&M CPT codes 99281-99285). Results: We found that the LoS agreement between student and faculty note versions was 63%, with 23% of all student notes receiving lower LoS compared to faculty notes (downcoded). This was found to be similar to baseline variability in professional coder LoS designations. Conclusions: Notes from medical students who have completed a focused documentation curriculum have less LoS downcoding than in previous reports.

Assessing Residency Applicants' Communication and Professionalism: Standardized Video Interview Scores Compared to Faculty Gestalt.

INTRODUCTION: The Association of American Medical Colleges has introduced the Standardized Video Interview (SVI) to assess the communication and professionalism skills of residency applicants to allow a more holistic view of applicants beyond academic performance. Initial data suggests scores are not correlated with academic performance and provide a new measure of applicant attributes. It is not currently known how the SVI compares to existing metrics for assessing communication and professionalism during the interview process. METHODS: Applicants to the University of Wisconsin Emergency Medicine Residency program were invited and interviewed without use of the SVI scores or videos. All faculty interviewers were blinded to applicants' SVI information and asked to rate each applicant on their communication and professionalism on a scale from 1-25 (faculty gestalt score), analogous to the 6-30 scoring used by the SVI. We transformed SVI scores to our 1-25 system (transformed SVI score) for ease of comparison and compared them to faculty gestalt scores as well as applicants' overall score for all components of their interview day (interview score). RESULTS: We collected data for 125 residency candidates. Each applicant received a faculty gestalt score from up to four faculty interviewers. There was no significant correlation of SVI scores with faculty gestalt scores (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient [rs] (123)=0.09, p=0.30) and no correlation with the overall interview score (rs(123)=0.01, p=0.93). Faculty gestalt scores were correlated positively with interview scores (rs(123)=0.65, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: SVI scores show no significant correlation with faculty gestalt scores of communication and professionalism. This could relate to bias introduced by knowledge of an applicant's academic performance, different types of questions being asked by faculty interviewers, or lack of uniform criteria by which faculty assess these competencies. Further research is needed to determine whether SVI scores or faculty gestalt correlate with performance during residency.

Cherry Picking Patients: Examining the Interval Between Patient Rooming and Resident Self-assignment.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the association between patient chief complaint and the time interval between patient rooming and resident physician self-assignment ("pickup time"). We hypothesized that significant variation in pickup time would exist based on chief complaint, thereby uncovering resident preferences in patient presentations. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was performed on consecutive patients at a single, academic, university-based emergency department with over 50,000 visits per year. All patients who presented from August 1, 2012, to July 31, 2013, and were initially seen by a resident were included in the analysis. Patients were excluded if not seen primarily by a resident or if registered with a chief complaint associated with trauma team activation. Data were abstracted from the electronic health record (EHR). The outcome measured was "pickup time," defined as the time interval between room assignment and resident self-assignment. We examined all complaints with >100 visits, with the remaining complaints included in the model in an "other" category. A proportional hazards model was created to control for the following prespecified demographic and clinical factors: age, race, sex, arrival mode, admission vital signs, Emergency Severity Index code, waiting room time before rooming, and waiting room census at time of rooming. RESULTS: Of the 30,382 patients eligible for the study, the median time to pickup was 6 minutes (interquartile range = 2-15 minutes). After controlling for the above factors, we found systematic and significant variation in the pickup time by chief complaint, with the longest times for patients with complaints of abdominal problems, numbness/tingling, and vaginal bleeding and shortest times for patients with ankle injury, allergic reaction, and wrist injury. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent variation in resident pickup time exists for common chief complaints. We suspect that this reflects residents preferentially choosing patients with simpler workups and less perceived diagnostic ambiguity. This work introduces pickup time as a metric that may be useful in the future to uncover and address potential physician bias. Further work is necessary to establish whether practice patterns in this study are carried beyond residency and persist among attendings in the community and how these patterns are shaped by the information presented via the EHR.

Focus on abnormal air: diagnostic ultrasonography for the acute abdomen.

Emergency ultrasonography is a frequently used imaging tool in the bedside diagnosis of the acute abdomen. Classic indications include imaging for acute abdominal aneurysm, acute cholecystitis, hydronephrosis, and free intra-abdominal fluid in patients with trauma or suspected vascular or ectopic pregnancy rupture. Point-of-care sonographic imaging often emphasizes the diagnostic utility of fluid and edema, both as a significant finding and as a desirable adjunct for improved imaging. Conversely, the finding of sonographic intra-abdominal air is commonly 'tolerated' as a necessary evil that can foil image acquisition. This is in stark contrast to the accepted diagnostic utility of air in other imaging modalities for the acute abdomen, such as computed tomography and conventional radiography. Countering the bias against air as a deterrent for diagnostic ultrasound's accuracy are several published studies suggesting that abnormal air patterns can be used with high precision to diagnose pneumoperitoneum. These studies advocate that sonographic findings of abnormal air can be straightforward and can become crucial for increasing the diagnostic yield of bedside ultrasound of the acute abdomen. They suggest that practitioners should familiarize themselves with the findings and techniques to gain the experience required to make the diagnosis with confidence. This article will discuss four groups of abnormal air patterns found in the abdomen and the retroperitoneum and the respective scanning techniques, with a focus on the use of ultrasound for diagnosing pneumoperitoneum and a suggested scanning approach in the emergency setting.