Ed Board Research Articles

Experiences of the emergency department environment: a qualitative study with caregivers of people with dementia.

ED crowding and boarding adversely impact older patients' care and outcomes. Little is known about how ED crowding impacts persons living with dementia, a vulnerable population. This study sought to explore ED experiences of caregivers of people with dementia during a period of ED crowding and boarding. We performed semi-structured interviews with caregivers of people with dementia with an ED visit during a period of ED crowding and boarding at two public hospitals experiencing a threefold increasein boardingfrom pre-pandemic levels. Participants were recruited via chart review. We coded data using an inductive approach. Three themes emerged from 29 caregiver interviews: (1) difficulty obtaining assistance, (2) patient harms, and (3) concerns about triage and rooming processes. First, caregivers described having to be proactive to obtain symptom control and assistance with mobility. Second, caregivers observed harms of noise and stimulation provoking agitation and delays in administration of routine medications. Third, caregivers felt it was inappropriate for people with dementia to receive care in waiting room chairs or to receive prolonged hallway care. Caregivers advocated for preferential considerations for rooming and rapid assessment to avoid agitation, facilitatd access to ED staff, and promote patient comfort. Caregivers of people with dementia associated ED environments with difficulty obtaining assistance, patient harms, and triage concerns. Strategies to mitigate the negative impacts of ED crowding on people with dementia should focus on environmental modifications, uptriage of people with dementia, supporting activities of daily living and mobility, andinnovation around patient disposition.

Characteristics, clinical care, and outcomes of sepsis among patients boarding in the emergency department.

Patients who first meet clinical criteria for sepsis while boarding in the emergency department (ED) may not receive optimal sepsis care. Assess the association between ED boarding status and sepsis quality of care and outcomes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to a large academic hospital from July 2021 to October 2023 who had clinical features consistent with sepsis present while physically in the ED. We compared outcomes for patients who experienced time zero (T-0; the time clinical features of sepsis were first present) while boarding in the ED (physically in the ED but admitted to a different service) to those experiencing T-0 while still under the care of the ED provider team. We used logistic regression to estimate the association between ED boarding status at T-0 and compliance with the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: Management Bundle (SEP-1) core measure, individual bundle element compliance, and hospital mortality adjusting for prespecified covariates. In a subgroup analysis among patients who had not already received antibiotics before T-0, we conducted a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the association between boarding status on time-to-antibiotics. Among 4795 patients meeting a clinical definition of sepsis in the ED, 422 (8.8%) experienced T-0 as ED boarders. These patients were similar in age, sex, and comorbidities compared with patients experiencing T-0 while still under ED care. Fewer patients with T-0 as an ED boarder received SEP-1 compliant care (25% vs. 38%, p < .001), including a lower proportion of fluid resuscitation (15% vs. 26%, p = .004) and lactate assessment (62% vs. 94%, p < .001). Overall, more patients in the ED boarder group received antibiotics within 3 hours, but one-third of patients had already received antibiotics prior to T-0. Among patients who had not already received antibiotics prior to T-0, experiencing T-0 as an ED boarder was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving antibiotics (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.67 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.84]) and longer time to antibiotics from T-0 (142 min vs. 100 min, p = .007). Sepsis patients experiencing T-0 as a boarder in the ED have a lower likelihood of receiving SEP-1 compliant care compared to patients who experience T-0 while still under ED care.

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

356 Variation in Duration of Emergency Department Boarding by Patient Demographics

356 Variation in Duration of Emergency Department Boarding by Patient Demographics

280 ‘What Are We Waiting For?’ Conflicting Perspectives on the Emergency Department Boarding Crisis: A Qualitative Analysis of Interviews With Patients, Frontline Providers and Hospital Leaders

280 ‘What Are We Waiting For?’ Conflicting Perspectives on the Emergency Department Boarding Crisis: A Qualitative Analysis of Interviews With Patients, Frontline Providers and Hospital Leaders

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Prolonged Boarding and Racial Discrimination and Dissatisfaction Among Emergency Department Patients

Emergency department (ED) boarding times have increased rapidly, but their health equity outcomes are unknown. To investigate whether prolonged ED boarding is associated with increased perceived racial discrimination and dissatisfaction and whether associations vary between patients from marginalized racial and ethnic groups vs non-Hispanic White patients. This is a cross-sectional study of hospitalized adults who boarded in the ED during internal medicine admissions at a large, urban hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, from June 2023 to January 2024. Equal proportions of non-Hispanic White patients and patients from marginalized racial and ethnic groups (American Indian or Alaska Native, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black and/or African American, and multiracial) were selected randomly. The duration of ED boarding was categorized as less than 4 hours (reference), 4 to less than 24 hours, and 24 or more hours. Primary outcomes were odds of reporting (1) discrimination via the Discrimination in Medical Settings scale, and (2) dissatisfaction via the adapted Picker Patient Experience-15 questionnaire. Marginalized race and ethnicity was tested as an effect modifier. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for patient age, sex, language, and insurance payer. Of 598 patients approached, 527 were enrolled, and 525 completed the surveys (response rate, 87.8%). The mean age (SD) was 60.6 (18.7) years, 300 patients (57.1%) were female, 246 patients (47.3%) identified as non-Hispanic White, and 274 (52.7%) were from a marginalized racial or ethnic group. In total, 135 (25.7%) boarded less than 4 hours (reference), 202 (38.5%) boarded 4 to less than 24 hours, and 188 (35.8%) boarded 24 hours or longer. Compared with less than 4 hours, boarding 24 hours or longer was associated with increased perceived discrimination (odds ratio [OR], 1.84; 95% CI, 1.14-2.99; P = .01). An increased association was observed in the subgroup of patients from racial and ethnic marginalized groups (OR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.20-4.65; P = .01); effect modification was not significant (P for interaction, .10). For all patients, boarding 24 hours or longer was associated with increased dissatisfaction with care (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.03-3.06; P = .04); effect modification was not significant (P for interaction, .80). In this cross-sectional study, hospitalized patients who boarded in the ED 24 hours or longer reported more discrimination and dissatisfaction with care, which may disproportionately affect patients from marginalized racial and ethnic groups. As ED boarding times increase nationally, it is critical to recognize their potential to exacerbate health inequities and to respond with equity-focused solutions.

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Implementation of the admission transfer unit to reduce emergency department boarding: A quality improvement initiative.

Emergency Department (ED) boarding crowds the emergency department, strains resources, leads to higher hospital costs, and is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, a negative patient experience, and patient adverse events. The time Ontario patients wait in emergency departments for inpatient beds continues to rise, with the average time admitted patients spend in the ED increasing between 2015 and 2019 from 13.8hours to 16.2hours. As reported in this quality improvement initiative, one potential solution is to repurpose short-stay medical assessment units for complex admitted medicine patients using an objective patient selection tool. Objectively selecting admitted ED patients with the highest risk for adverse events and prioritizing them to move to a transitional unit advances safe quality patient care and decreases Time-to-Inpatient Bed (TIB). Results from this quality improvement initiative include reducing the organization's TIB by 13hours.

Majoring on the minors: Regulatory organizations turn a blind eye to emergency department boarding in favor of rare conditions.

Majoring on the minors: Regulatory organizations turn a blind eye to emergency department boarding in favor of rare conditions.

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Driving in the Wrong Direction: Exploring the Unintended Consequence of an Early Discharge Program on Length of Stay in Hospital Setting.

Early discharge of patients has become standard work in acute care settings to reduce inpatient length of stay (LOS), improve patient flow, and reduce boarding in the emergency department (ED). Retrospective analysis of outcomes from a discharge by 11 am program at an academic medical center from January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. The analysis addresses the effects of a discharge by 11 am goal on time from discharge order release to patient discharge, ED boarding, LOS, and observed-to-expected LOS. Patient-level electronic health record data included discharge order entry time, discharge time, LOS, and diagnosis-related group geometric LOS (GMLOS). Additional unit-level data for ED boarding volumes and hours were included. Analyses were conducted at the hospital and unit levels where indicated. Patients with a discharge order by 9 am have longer mean hours from order to discharge than patients without a discharge order by 9 am (9.04 vs 2.48 hours, P < .001) ED boarding total (R2=46.2%, P ≤.001), percentage (R2=50.4%, P ≤.001), median minutes (R2=24.6%, P =.005), and total minutes (R2=40.8%, P ≤.001) all increased as discharge by 11 am performance improved. The mean LOS is longer for the discharge by 11 am group than the non-discharge by 11 am group -1.67; 95% CI, -2.03 to -1.28, P <.001). Discharge by 11 am patients had a LOS/GMLOS ratio 21.9% higher than the non-discharge by 11 am cohort (difference -0.31; 95% CI, -0.36 to -0.26, P < .001). Discharge order entry and release by 9 am and patient physically discharged by 11 am initiatives demonstrate a statistical increase in time from discharge order to discharge time, ED boarding, LOS, and observed-to-expected LOS.

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Disparities in Psychiatric Emergency Department Boarding of Children and Adolescents

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency department boarding of youth with mental health concerns has increased. To summarize characteristics (including gender, age, race, ethnicity, insurance, diagnosis, and barriers to placement) of youth who boarded in emergency departments while awaiting inpatient psychiatric care and to test for racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in boarding lengths and inpatient admission rates after boarding. Secondarily, to assess whether statewide demand for inpatient psychiatric care correlated with individual outcomes. This cross-sectional analysis included administrative data collected from May 2020 to June 2022 and represented a statewide study of Massachusetts. All youth aged 5 to 17 years who boarded in Massachusetts emergency departments for 3 or more midnights while awaiting inpatient psychiatric care were included. Boarding for 3 or more midnights while awaiting inpatient psychiatric care. Emergency department boarding length (number of midnights) and whether inpatient care was received after boarding. Statistical analyses performed included logistic and gamma regressions; assessed gender, racial, and ethnic disparities; and correlations between statewide demand for psychiatric care and boarding outcomes. A total of 4942 boarding episodes were identified: 2648 (54%) for cisgender females, 1958 (40%) for cisgender males, and 336 (7%) for transgender or nonbinary youth. A total of 1337 youth (27%) were younger than 13 years. Depression was the most common diagnosis (2138 [43%]). A total of 2748 episodes (56%) resulted in inpatient admission, and 171 transgender and nonbinary youth (51%) received inpatient care compared with 1558 cisgender females (59%; adjusted difference: -9.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -14.7 to -3.6 percentage points). Transgender or nonbinary youth boarded for a mean (SD) of 10.4 (8.3) midnights compared with 8.6 (6.9) midnights for cisgender females (adjusted difference: 2.2 midnights; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2 midnights). Fewer Black youth were admitted than White youth (382 [51%] and 1231 [56%], respectively; adjusted difference: -4.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.4 to -0.2 percentage points). For every additional 100 youth boarding statewide on the day of assessment, the percentage of youth admitted was 19.4 percentage points lower (95% CI, -23.6% to -15.2%) and boarding times were 3.0 midnights longer (95% CI, 2.4-3.7 midnights). In this cross-sectional study, almost one-half of 3 or more midnight boarding episodes did not result in admission, highlighting a need to understand the effects of boarding without admission. Gender and racial disparities were identified, suggesting the need for targeted resources to reduce boarding and promote equitable access to care.

Impact of emergency department boarding on patients outcomes in hip fractures

BackgroundBoarding time in the Emergency Department (ED) is an area of concern for all patients and potentially more problematic for the hip fracture population. Identifying patient outcomes impacted by ED boarding and improving emergent care to reduce surgical delay for this patient population is a recognized opportunity. The objective of this study is to examine the impact of ED boarding in relation to patient outcomes in the surgical hip fracture population. MethodsThis is a retrospective study of hip fracture patients who presented at the ED of a Level 1 trauma center between January 2020 and December 2021. Patients were categorized into four quartiles based on boarding time. Study outcomes—hospital length of stay, time to surgery, visit to ICU post-operative, total blood products, in-hospital complications, discharge disposition, in-hospital mortality, and 30-day readmission—were compared among these four quartiles. ResultsThe outcome endpoints were comparable among the four quartiles except for time to surgery. Time to surgery significantly differed among the quartiles, increasing from 20.39 to 29.03 h (p < 0.001) from the first to fourth quartile. ConclusionIn contrast to the existing literature, ED boarding in our study was not associated with adverse outcomes except for time to surgery. By expediting the time to surgery in accordance with established guidelines, adverse outcomes were mitigated even when our patients boarded for a longer duration. System processes including a 24/7 trauma nurse practitioner model, availability of in-house orthopedic surgeons, and timely cardiac evaluation need to be considered in relation to time to surgery, in turn impacting ED boarding and patient outcomes.

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Cover and Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board, ACTFL Officers Page

Issue Information ‐ Ed Board, ACTFL Officers Page