BASCULE study: Is it possible to refer patients after triage in an emergency department to community medicine from a capacity standpoint for general medicine ?

Objectives: Although emergency department (ED) return visits are a significant problem universally, it has not been previously studied in our ED. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of the problem in our ED, to identify the relevant clinical predictor variables and to detect diagnostic errors.Methods: A retrospective observational study of ED return visits by patients managed by the General Internal Medicine (GIM) service was performed. The study was performed over a one year period at a tertiary hospital ED. Data are reported as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: There were a total of 51.210 ED visits during the study period. The total number of ED return visits within 72 hours was 1.124 (2,19%; 95% CI 2,07 to 2,32). The total number of ED patients managed by the GIM service was 9.511. The percentage of patients treated by the GIM service who returned to the ED within 72 hours was 1,48% (95% CI 1,25 to 1,74) when calculated for the whole group and 2,9 % (95% CI 2,46-3,41) for those discharged home from the ED (n=4.860). The majority (82,98%) of ED return visits by patients discharged from the GIM service were unscheduled and related to their index presenting complaint. Abdominal pain was the commonest initial presenting symptom in the patients who returned to the ED after discharge. Patients with diarrhoea as the initial initial presenting symptom had the highest relative risk of an ED return visit (RR=4.07).Conclusion: The percentage ED return visits by patients discharged from the ED by the GIM service is 1,48%. Patients presenting with diarrhoea as the initial presenting symptom have the highest relative risk of an early ED return visit. Our main practical conclusion is that patients with abdominal pain need to be re-examined carefully and instructed about potential evolution before discharge.

Background and aimSince 2014, the annual number of patients entering our emergency department (ED) has increased significantly. These were primarily Internal Medicine (IM) patients, and of these, 25–30% were admitted. The present governmental policy presents a deterrent to adding IM beds for these patients, and Emergency and IM departments cope with ever-increasing number of IM patients. We describe a quality improvement intervention to increase outflow of IM patients from the ED to the IM departments.MethodsWe conducted a quality improvement intervention at the Shaare Zedek Medical Center from 2014 to 2018. The first stage consisted of an effort to increase morning discharges from the IM departments. The second stage consisted of establishing a process to increase the number of admissions to the IM departments from the ED.ResultsImplementation of the first stage led to an increased morning discharge rate from a baseline of 2–4 to 18%. The second stage led to an immediate mean (± SD) morning transfer of 35 ± 7 patients to the medical departments (8–12 per department), providing significant relief for the ED. However, the additional workload for the IM departments’ medical and nursing staff led to a rapid decrease in morning discharges, returning to pre-intervention rates. Throughout the period of the new throughput intervention, morning admissions increased from 30 to > 70%, and were sustained. The number of patients in each department increased from 36 to 38 to a new steady state of 42–44, included constant hallway housing, and often midday peaks of 48–50 patients. Mean length of stay did not change. IM physician and nurse dissatisfaction led to increased number of patients being admitted during the evening and night hours and fewer during the morning.ConclusionWe describe a quality improvement intervention to improve outflow of medical patients from the ED in the morning hours. The new ED practices had mixed effects. They led to less ED crowding in the morning hours but increased dissatisfaction among the IM department medical and nursing staff due to an increased number of admissions in a limited number of hours. The present governmental reimbursement policy needs to address hospital overcrowding as it relates to limited community healthcare beds and an aging population.

Background: Despite the central role of Internal Medicine (IM) in emergency admission management, both users and health planners do not seem to recognize the distinct features of the activities relative to IM. According to the Literature, the role of IM is characterized by: (1) Acute, critical, multiple pathology and complex patient management; (2) Difficult clinical diagnosis; (3) Individuation of priorities; (4). Hospitalterritory pathways promoting integration of diverse specialist activities. Objective: To determine the proportion of correct and missed emergency department (ED) diagnoses compared to IM discharge diagnoses. Methods: ED diagnoses and hospital IM discharge diagnoses were compared. By using the consensus among experts method a diagnosis evaluation grid was formed. Diagnosis was defined as follows: (1) The “gold standard” diagnosis (correct diagnosis), according to ICD10 (10th International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems), independently made by two experienced IM specialists and reported in the discharge letter. (2) ED diagnosis made by the Emergency Physician and reported in the patient acceptance or transfer record to the Internal Medicine Unit; (3) Priority Error: the correct diagnosis appears as a secondary diagnosis in the ED diagnosis; (4) Incomplete diagnosis: diagnostic orientation without a precise diagnosis; (5) Diagnosis Error: the correct diagnosis was not made in the ED. The first 13 diagnoses made in ED are defined as the most frequent in number within the sample being examined. Results: 317 non trauma patients presenting to the ED from June to September 2016 and admitted to the INI (Italian Neurotraumatology Institute) IM department were included for final analysis. The final diagnosis at IM discharge was taken to be the correct “gold standard” diagnosis. In 180 patients (56,7%) this corresponded with the primary ED diagnosis, in 104 patients (32,8%) the diagnosis was missed and in the remaining 10.5%, the diagnosis (33 patients) was incomplete or a priority error occurred. The most frequent final diagnoses were cardiac failure (n =53), pneumonia (n= 43), TIA (Transient Ischemic Attack) (n=31); respiratory failure (n=28); COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) (n=21), correctly diagnosed in the ED in 37, 26, 19, 20, and 11 patients, respectively. Conclusion: Patients presenting to ED with acute symptoms represent a diagnostic challenge that in 43.3% of cases is explained by the clinical activity carried out by the Internal Medicine specialist during hospitalization. The study confirms the central role of Internal Medicine in defining the correct diagnosis in acute and complex patients. It is likely time to instigate awareness campaigns for patients and policy makers promoting the central role of Internal Medicine in hospital organization and hospital-territory integration and to duly recognize the complexity of IM activity through the endorsement of appropriate DRGs (Diagnosis Related Groups) in the Medical Area.

Forget Paris: Emergency Physicians Can Soon Sit for US Critical Care Boards

Intern Workload and Discontinuity of Care on 30-Day Readmission

ObjectiveEspecially in emergency departments (EDs), a lack of internal medicine (IM) residents in charge causes difficulties in medical care and ED overcrowding. Thus, protocols without IM residents in EDs is needed. This study aimed to investigate changes in medical care when emergency medicine residents replaced the roles of IM residents.MethodsThis study was conducted at a single-site ED of a university medical center. The study group contained patients admitted to the IM department between September and December 2015, during which IM residents were absent in the ED. The control group contained patients admitted to the IM department between September and December 2014, during which IM residents were present in the ED. Changes in medical care between the presence and absence of IM residents in the ED were studied by comparing admission rates from the ED, length of ED stay, duration of hospitalization, and concordance of diagnoses between admission and discharge by the IM department.ResultsThe study group contained 2,341 patients; the control group contained 2,215 patients. Admission rates from the ED increased by 53.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], P<0.001); lengths of stay decreased by 15.1% (95% CI, P<0.001); and durations of hospitalization in the pulmonology department decreased by 38.4% (95% CI, P=0.001). Concordance of diagnoses between admission and discharge decreased by 14.2% in the cardiology department (95% CI, P=0.021).ConclusionLengths of stay were reduced without critical declines in diagnostic concordance rates when emergency medicine physicians, instead of IM residents in the ED, decided upon admissions of IM patients.

Introduction: Prior evidence demonstrates higher inpatient mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites who undergo diagnostic paracentesis 12 hours after first physician encounter. However, the initial location of patient presentation and its impact on time to paracentesis has not been thoroughly studied. This analysis compared outcomes in patients with Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP) by location, either in the Emergency Department (ED) or the Internal Medicine (IM) floor, and timeliness of paracentesis. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients aged 18 and older admitted to Duke University Health System (Duke Hospital, Duke Regional Hospital, Duke Raleigh Hospital) from 2018 to 2020 for decompensated cirrhosis who were diagnosed with SBP after paracentesis. We excluded patients who were incarcerated, had ascites from a non-hepatobiliary source, or were presumptively diagnosed with SBP without paracentesis. Chi square tests assessed the association between time to and location of paracentesis with patient outcomes including appropriate administration of albumin and mortality. Timeliness was categorically organized by < 12 hours or ≥12 hours to paracentesis. Location was defined as paracentesis done in the ED or by the IM team. Results: 76 patients were included, of whom 33 had paracenteses performed by the ED, 41 by the IM service, and 2 by the surgical service. The median time to paracentesis in the ED was 4.8 hours compared to 21.1 hours by IM (p< 0.001). The location of paracentesis did not significantly impact receipt of day 1 and 3 albumin administration (ED 66.7% vs IM 82.9%; p=0.09), inpatient mortality (ED 36.6% vs IM 17.1%; p=0.06), or 30-day mortality (ED 45.5% vs IM 22.0%; p=0.06). Completion of paracentesis before and after 12 hours did not significantly impact albumin administration rates (67.4% vs 84.9%; p=0.08), inpatient mortality (27.9% vs 24.2%; p=0.72), or 30-day mortality (36.6% vs 30.3%; p=0.57). Conclusion: Diagnostic paracentesis is performed significantly sooner if done by ED rather than IM providers. However, the location and timeliness of the paracentesis did not alter mortality and albumin administration. Though limited by sample size, these results may suggest that providers are more likely to initiate appropriate antibiotics for suspected SBP given its morbidity, so time to paracentesis < 12 hours may not be as clinically important as time to initiation of treatment.

The General Internal Medicine (GIM) Care Transformation Initiative implemented at one of four teaching hospitals in the same city resulted in improved efficiency of in-hospital care. Whether it had beneficial effects upstream in the emergency department (ED) is unclear. Controlled before-after study of ED length of stay (LOS) and crowding metrics for the intervention site (n = 108,951 visits) compared to the three other teaching hospitals (controls, n = 300,930 visits). Our primary outcome was ED LOS for GIM patients but secondary outcomes included ED LOS for all adults and ED crowding metrics. The GIM Care Transformation was associated with an additional 2.8-hour reduction in median ED LOS (from 25.6 hours to 13.5 hours) over and above the 9.3-hour decline (from 30.6 hours to 21.3 hours) seen in the three control EDs for GIM patients who were hospitalized (p < 0.001). As less than one in 30 ED visits resulted in a GIM ward admission, the median ED LOS for all patients declined by 15 minutes (from 4.6 hours to 4.3 hours, p < 0.001) in the control hospitals and by 30 minutes (from 5.7 hours to 5.1 hours, p < 0.001) at the intervention hospital pre versus post (p = 0.04 for the 15-minute additional reduction, p < 0.001 for level change on interrupted time series). Other metrics of ED crowding improved by similar amounts at the intervention and control hospitals with no statistically significant differences. Although the GIM Care Transformation Initiative was associated with substantial reductions in ED LOS for patients admitted to GIM wards at the intervention hospital, it resulted in only minor changes in overall ED LOS and no appreciable changes in ED crowding metrics.

The SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed unprecedented challenges on the health care system in the United States with New York City at its epicenter. By the end of the 8 week (4/23/2020) since the virus's emergence in New York City, there have been 142,432 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 10,977 deaths attributed to complications from COVID-19-related illnesses. Secondary to policies enacted by the New York State government to limit spread of the virus, Orthopedic Surgery departments at hospitals around the area have witnessed an abrupt change in clinical demands. At a local level one trauma hospital in Queens, New York, Orthopedic Surgery elective cases have been cancelled, trauma consult volume has experienced a sharp decline, and both residents and attendings have been repurposed to meet the new clinical demands of this medical crisis. Our own orthopedic surgery service has adopted care for patients normally admitted to an internal medicine service in a novel Ortho-Medical COVID-19 management team. We prepared this primer to make our experience with caring for COVID-19 patents available as a reference for other surgical subspecialty services preparing to adjust the clinical focus of their hospital teams during this or future pandemics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Level V.

A Five-Year Experience of a Short Stay Observation Unit in Saudi Arabia

Many patients are discharged from the emergency department (ED) with an incomplete understanding of the information needed to safely care for themselves at home. Patients have demonstrated particular difficulty in understanding post-ED care instructions (including medications, home care, and follow-up). The objective of this study was to further characterize these deficits and identify gaps in knowledge that may place the patient at risk for complications or poor outcomes. This was a prospective cohort, phone interview-based study of 159 adult English-speaking patients within 24 to 36 hours of ED discharge. Patient knowledge was assessed for five diagnoses (ankle sprain, back pain, head injury, kidney stone, and laceration) across the following five domains: diagnosis, medications, home care, follow-up, and return instructions. Knowledge was determined based on the concordance between direct patient recall and diagnosis-specific discharge instructions combined with chart review. Two authors scored each case independently and discussed discrepancies before providing a final score for each domain (no, minimal, partial, or complete comprehension). Descriptive statistics were used for the analyses. The study population was 50% female with a median age of 41 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 29 to 53 years). Knowledge deficits were demonstrated by the majority of patients in the domain of home care instructions (80%) and return instructions (79%). Less frequent deficits were found for the domains of follow-up (39%), medications (22%), and diagnosis (14%). Minimal or no understanding in at least one domain was demonstrated by greater than two-thirds of patients and was found in 40% of cases for home care and 51% for return instructions. These deficits occurred less frequently for domains of follow-up (18%), diagnosis (3%), and medications (3%). Patients demonstrate the most frequent knowledge deficits for home care and return instructions, raising significant concerns for adherence and outcomes.

Overcrowding in the emergency departments (ED) is a significant issue associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates as well as decreased patient satisfaction. Length of stay (LOS) is both a cause and a result of overcrowding. In Israel, as there are few emergency medicine (EM) physicians, the ED team is supplemented with doctors from specialties including internal medicine, general surgery, orthopedics etc. Here we compare ED length of stay (ED-LOS), treatment time and decision time between EM physicians, internists and general surgeons.A retrospective cohort study was conducted examining the Emergency Department length of stay (ED-LOS) for all adult patients attending Sheba Medical Center ED, Israel, between January 1st, and December 31st, 2014. Using electronic medical records, data was gathered on patient age, sex, primary ED physician, diagnosis, eventual disposition, treatment time and disposition decision time. The primary outcome variable was ED-LOS relative to case physician specialty and level (ED, internal medicine or surgery; specialist or resident). Secondary analysis was conducted on time to treatment/ decision as well as ED-LOS relative to patient classification variables (internal medicine vs surgical diagnosis). Specialists were compared to specialists and residents to residents for all outcomes.Residents and specialists in either EM, internal medicine or general surgery attended 57,486 (51.50%) of 111,630 visits to Sheba Hospital's general ED. Mean ED-LOS was 4.12 ± 3.18 hours. Mean treatment time and decision time were 1.79 ± 1.82 hours, 2.84 ± 2.17 hours respectively. Amongst specialists, ED-LOS was shorter for EM physicians than for internal medicine physicians (mean difference 0.28 hours, 95% CI 0.14–0.43) and general surgeons (mean difference 0.63 hours, 95% CI 0.43–0.83). There was no statistical significance between residents when comparing outcomes.Increasing the number of EM specialists in the ED may support efforts to decrease ED-LOS, overcrowding and medical errors whilst increasing patient satisfaction and outcomes.

BackgroundRising rates of unplanned admissions among older people are placing unprecedented demand on health services internationally. Unplanned hospital admissions for ill-defined conditions (coded with an R prefix within Chapter XVIII of the International Classification of Diseases-10) have been targeted for admission avoidance strategies, but little is known about these admissions. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and factors predicting ill-defined (R-coded) hospital admissions of older people and their association with health outcomes.MethodsRetrospective analysis of unplanned hospital admissions to general internal and geriatric medicine wards in one hospital over 12 months (2002) with follow-up for 36 months. The study was carried out in an acute teaching hospital in England. The participants were all people aged 65 and over with unplanned hospital admissions to general internal and geriatric medicine. Independent variables included time of admission, residence at admission, route of admission to hospital, age, gender, comorbidity measured by count of diagnoses. Main outcome measures were primary diagnosis (ill-defined versus other diagnostic code), death during the hospital stay, deaths to 36 months, readmissions within 36 months, discharge destination and length of hospital stay.ResultsIncidence of R-codes at discharge was 21.6%, but was higher in general internal than geriatric medicine (25.6% v 14.1% respectively). Age, gender and co-morbidity were not significant predictors of R-code diagnoses. Admission via the emergency department (ED), out of normal general practitioner (GP) hours, under the care of general medicine and from non-residential care settings increased the risk of receiving R-codes. R-coded patients had a significantly shorter length of stay (5.91 days difference, 95% CI 4.47, 7.35), were less likely to die (hazard ratio 0.71, 95%CI 0.59, 0.85) at any point, but were as likely to be readmitted as other patients (hazard ratio 0.96 (95% CI 0.88, 1.05).ConclusionsR-coded diagnoses accounted for 1/5 of emergency admission episodes, higher than anticipated from total English hospital admissions, but comparable with rates reported in similar settings in other countries. Unexpectedly, age did not predict R-coded diagnosis at discharge. Lower mortality and length of stay support the view that these are avoidable admissions, but readmission rates particularly for further R-coded admissions indicate on-going health care needs. Patient characteristics did not predict R-coding, but organisational features, particularly admission via the ED, out of normal GP hours and via general internal medicine, were important and may offer opportunity for admission reduction strategies.

Uninsured and insured but out-of-network emergency department (ED) patients are often billed hospital chargemaster prices, which exceed amounts typically paid by insurers. To examine the variation in excess charges for services provided by emergency medicine and internal medicine physicians. Retrospective analysis was conducted of professional fee payment claims made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for all services provided to Medicare Part B fee-for-service beneficiaries in calendar year 2013. Data analysis was conducted from January 1 to July 31, 2016. Markup ratios for ED and internal medicine professional services, defined as the charges submitted by the hospital divided by the Medicare allowable amount. Our analysis included 12 337 emergency medicine physicians from 2707 hospitals and 57 607 internal medicine physicians from 3669 hospitals in all 50 states. Services provided by emergency medicine physicians had an overall markup ratio of 4.4 (340% excess charges), which was greater than the markup ratio of 2.1 (110% excess charges) for all services performed by internal medicine physicians. Markup ratios for all ED services ranged by hospital from 1.0 to 12.6 (median, 4.2; interquartile range [IQR], 3.3-5.8); markup ratios for all internal medicine services ranged by hospital from 1.0 to 14.1 (median, 2.0; IQR, 1.7-2.5). The median markup ratio by hospital for ED evaluation and management procedure codes varied between 4.0 and 5.0. Among the most common ED services, laceration repair had the highest median markup ratio (7.0); emergency medicine physician review of a head computed tomographic scan had the greatest interhospital variation (range, 1.6-27.7). Across hospitals, markups in the ED were often substantially higher than those in the internal medicine department for the same services. Higher ED markup ratios were associated with hospital for-profit ownership (median, 5.7; IQR, 4.0-7.1), a greater percentage of uninsured patients seen (median, 5.0; IQR, 3.5-6.7 for ≥20% uninsured), and location (median, 5.3; IQR, 3.8-6.8 for the southeastern United States). Across hospitals, there is wide variation in excess charges on ED services, which are often priced higher than internal medicine services. Our results inform policy efforts to protect uninsured and out-of-network patients from highly variable pricing.

Patients in the emergency department (ED) who have been admitted to hospital (inpatient "boarders") are associated with ED overcrowding. They are also a symptom of a hospital-wide imbalance between demand and supply of resources. We analyzed the trends of inpatient admissions, ED boarding volumes, lengths of stay and bed resources of 3 major admitting services at our teaching institution. We used hospital databases from Jan. 1, 2004, to Dec. 31, 2007, to analyze ED visits that resulted in admission to hospital. During the study period, 21 986 ED patients were admitted to hospital. The percentage of cancer-related admissions to the oncology admitting service decreased from 48% in 2004 to 24% in 2007, and admissions to general internal medicine (GIM) increased nearly 2-fold, from 28% in 2004 to 54% in 2007. In addition, GIM admitted about 10% more myocardial infarction and heart failure patients than did cardiology. General internal medicine constituted the majority of ED boarders and had a median boarding length of stay of approximately 15 hours. Inpatient beds on oncology and cardiology services remained static. Without bed capacity to admit more patients, our specialty services relied on GIM to serve as a safety net. At the same time, GIM was cited as a main source of ED congestion as their patients occupied more ED beds for longer periods than any other admitting service. The data presented in this study has helped effect positive change within our institution. Other hospitals running at or near capacity and faced with similar ED congestion may apply the methods we used in this study to analyze the cause and nature of their situation.