Emergency Department Departure Research Articles

Effectiveness and Safety of an Emergency Department Code Sepsis Protocol: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

Sepsis care delivery - including initiation of prompt, appropriate antimicrobials - remains suboptimal. Determine direct and off-target effects of emergency department (ED) sepsis care reorganization. This pragmatic pilot trial enrolled adult patients presenting November 2019 to February 2021 to an ED in Utah before and after implementation of a multimodal, team-based "Code Sepsis" protocol. Patients presenting to two other EDs where usual care was continued served as contemporaneous controls. The primary outcome was door-to-antimicrobial time among patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria before ED departure. Secondary and safety outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, antimicrobial utilization and overtreatment, and antimicrobial-associated adverse events. Multivariable regression analyses employed difference-in-differences methods to account for trends in outcomes unrelated to the studied intervention. Code Sepsis protocol activation (N=307) exhibited 8.5% sensitivity and 66% positive predictive value for patients meeting sepsis criteria before ED departure. Among 10,151 patients meeting sepsis criteria during the study, adjusted difference-in-differences analysis demonstrated a 13-minute (95% CI 7-19-minute) decrease in door-to-antimicrobial time associated with Code Sepsis implementation (p<0.001). Mortality and clinical safety outcomes were unchanged, but Code Sepsis implementation was associated with increased false-positive presumptive infection diagnosis among patients meeting sepsis criteria in the ED and increased antimicrobial utilization. Implementation of a team-based protocol for rapid sepsis evaluation and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic's first year was associated with decreased ED door-to-antimicrobial time but also increased antimicrobial utilization. Measurement of both patient-centered and off-target effects of sepsis care improvement interventions is essential to comprehensive assessment of their value. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04148989) This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Impact of boarding time on in-hospital mortality in patients with cancer presenting to the emergency department.

11036 Background: Longer emergency department (ED) boarding times for admitted patients is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.1 While research over the years has shown an association between boarding time to mortality in a variety of patient demographics, no specific research has been explored in a cancer population. Patients with cancer visit the emergency department frequently and have a high rate of admission compared to other patients.2 This study evaluates boarding times and mortality rates in patients presenting to an oncologic ED. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 183,524 ED visits located at a comprehensive cancer center between March 2016 and December 2022. Eligibility criteria included patients 19 years and older admitted to the hospital excluding direct intensive care unit admission. Boarding time was defined from the time the physician made an order to admit to the hospital to the time of ED departure. Demographics and clinical characteristics were examined using descriptive statistics. Categorical data was analyzed using chi-square test and continuous variables employed the nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test. Boarding time was grouped into quartiles. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses examined clinical factors, including boarding time and in-hospital mortality. Results: The eligible number of visits supporting the study equaled 83,629. Overall median boarding time was 2.7 hours (interquartile range: 1.5–5.1 hours) and in-hospital mortality was 5.5% (n=4607). Longer boarding time was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. Patients with boarding time ≥5.1 hours had 1.19 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.09-1.30; P&lt;0.001) odds of in-hospital mortality when compared to the reference group (boarding time &lt;1.5 hours) when controlling for other risk factors including comorbidities and emergency severity index (ESI) between 1 through 5. Similar results were observed for patients with boarding times of ≥1.5- &lt;2.7 hours and ≥2.7- &lt;5.1 hours with odds ratio of 1.12 (95%CI: 1.02-1.22; P=0.013) and 1.11 (95%CI: 1.02-1.21; P=0.020), respectively. Higher Charlson comorbidity index and levels 1 and 2 ESI were also associated with poor survival outcome (P&lt;0.001 for both). Conclusions: This study found an association between boarding time and in-hospital mortality in cancer patients presenting to the ED. Patients with longer boarding times were likely to experience mortality during their hospital admission. High comorbidity score and high-risk ESI were also identified as risk factors for poor survival outcome. These results emphasize the need for improved strategies to expedite the admission process and optimize care for cancer patients in the ED to reduce mortality rates. Further research and interventions targeting reduction in boarding times are warranted to improve outcomes for this vulnerable population.

From symptom onset to ED departure: understanding the acute care chain for patients with undifferentiated complaints: a prospective observational study.

For most acute conditions, the phase prior to emergency department (ED) arrival is largely unexplored. However, this prehospital phase has proven an important part of the acute care chain (ACC) for specific time-sensitive conditions, such as stroke and myocardial infarction. For patients with undifferentiated complaints, exploration of the prehospital phase of the ACC may also offer a window of opportunity for improvement of care. This study aims to explore the ACC of ED patients with undifferentiated complaints, with specific emphasis on time in ACC and patient experience. This Dutch prospective observational study, included all adult (≥ 18 years) ED patients with undifferentiated complaints over a 4-week period. We investigated the patients' journey through the ACC, focusing on time in ACC and patient experience. Additionally, a multivariable linear regression analysis was employed to identify factors independently associated with time in ACC. Among the 286 ED patients with undifferentiated complaints, the median symptom duration prior to ED visit was 6 days (IQR 2-10), during which 58.6% of patients had contact with a healthcare provider before referral. General Practitioners (GPs) referred 80.4% of the patients, with the predominant patient journey (51.7%) involving GP referral followed by self-transportation to the ED. The median time in ACC was 5.5 (IQR 4.0-8.4) hours of which 40% was spent before the ED visit. GP referral and referral to pulmonology were associated with a longer time in ACC, while referral during evenings was associated with a shorter time in ACC. Patients scored both quality and duration of the provided care an 8/10. Dutch ED patients with undifferentiated complaints consulted a healthcare provider in over half of the cases before their ED visit. The median time in ACC is 5.5h of which 40% is spent in the prehospital phase. Those referred by a GP and to pulmonology had a longer, and those in the evening a shorter time in ACC. The acute care journey starts hours before patients arrive at the ED and 6 days of complaints precede this journey. This timeframe could serve as a window of opportunity to optimise care.

The impact of partnered pharmacist medication charting in the emergency department on the use of potentially inappropriate medications in older people.

Introduction: A process redesign, partnered pharmacist medication charting (PPMC), was recently piloted in the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary hospital. The PPMC model was intended to improve medication safety and interdisciplinary collaboration by having pharmacists work closely with medical officers to review and chart medications for patients. This study, therefore, aimed to evaluate the impact of PPMC on potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use. Methods: A pragmatic concurrent controlled study compared a PPMC group to both early best-possible medication history (BPMH) and usual care groups. In the PPMC group, pharmacists initially documented the BPMH and collaborated with medical officers to co-develop treatment plans and chart medications in ED. The early BPMH group included early BPMH documentation by pharmacists, followed by traditional medication charting by medical officers in ED. The usual care group followed the traditional charting approach by medical officers, without a pharmacist-collected BPMH or collaborative discussion in ED. Included were older people (≥65 years) presenting to the ED with at least one regular medication with subsequent admission to an acute medical unit. PIM outcomes (use of at least one PIM, PIMs per patient and PIMs per medication prescribed) were assessed at ED presentation, ED departure and hospital discharge using Beers criteria. Results: Use of at least one PIM on ED departure was significantly lower for the PPMC group than for the comparison groups (χ2, p = 0.040). However, PIM outcomes at hospital discharge were not statistically different between groups. PIM outcomes on ED departure or hospital discharge did not differ from baseline within the comparison groups. Discussion: In conclusion, PIM use on leaving ED, but not at hospital discharge, was reduced with PPMC. Close interprofessional collaboration, as in ED, needs to continue on the wards.

Association of delirium with increased short-term mortality among older emergency department patients: A cohort study

Study objectiveTo evaluate the association between delirium and subsequent short-term mortality in geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). MethodsThis was an observational cohort study of adults age ≥75 years who presented to an academic ED and were screened for delirium during their ED visit. The Delirium Triage Screen followed by the Brief Confusion Assessment Method were used to ascertain the presence of delirium. In-hospital, 7-day, and 30-day mortality were compared between patients with and without ED delirium. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated through logistic regression after adjusting for confounders including age, sex, history of dementia, ED disposition, and acuity. ResultsA total of 967 ED visits were included for analysis among which delirium was detected in 107 (11.1%). The median age of the cohort was 83 years (IQR 79, 88), 526 (54.4%) were female, 285 (29.5%) had documented dementia, and 171 (17.7%) had a high acuity Emergency Severity Index triage level 1 or 2. During the hospitalization, 5/107 (4.7%) of those with delirium and 4/860 (0.5%) of those without delirium died. Within 7 days of ED departure, 6/107 (5.6%) of those with delirium and 6/860 (0.7%) of those without delirium died (unadjusted OR 8.46, 95% CI 2.68–26.71). Within 30 days, 18/107 (16.8%) of those with delirium and 37/860 (4.3%) of those without delirium died (unadjusted OR 4.50, 95% CI 2.46–8.23). ED delirium remained associated with higher 7-day (adjusted OR 5.23, 95% CI 1.44–19.05, p = 0.008) and 30-day mortality (adjusted OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.45–5.46, p = 0.002). ConclusionDelirium is an important prognostic factor that ED clinicians and nurses must be aware of to optimize delirium prevention, management, disposition, and communication with patients and families.

Race and Other Disparate Demographic Variables Identified Among Emergency Department Boarders.

IntroductionEmergency department (ED) boarding, the process of holding patients in the ED due to a lack of inpatient beds after the decision is made to admit, has profound consequences. Increased ED boarding times are associated with adverse patient outcomes, including increased mortality. While previous studies have demonstrated racial disparities with regard to ED boarding, current literature lacks insight into discrepancies that may exist among other demographic groups as it pertains to ED boarding. We sought to review ED boarding times differentiated by demographic characteristics.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of all ED admissions from an academic ED in the Southeast from April–September 2019. The primary outcome assessed was boarding time, defined as time from decision to admit to ED departure. Patient demographic data including race, gender, and age were collected and analyzed. We performed descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses.ResultsThe study population included 17,606 patients with a mean age of 56.3. Nearly half (49.8%) of the patients were female. Additionally, 43.8% of patients were Black and 48.6% White. For all admissions, there was no difference in mean boarding time among Black and White patients (5.2 ± 8.8 vs 5.2 ± 8.2 hours, P = 0.11). Among Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level I admissions, Black patients boarded longer than White patients (4.1 ± 0.3 vs 2.7 ± 0.3 hours, P = 0.009). Black patients also boarded significantly longer than White patients for psychiatric admissions (22.7 ± 23.7 vs 18.5 ± 19.4 hours, P <0.05). For all admissions, males boarded longer than females (5.5 ± 8.5 vs 4.9 ± 8.2 hours, P <.0001). Patients older than 75 boarded for less time (3.8 ± 6.2 hours) compared to younger groups (15–24: 6.4 ± 10.8 hours; 25–44: 6.6 ± 10.8; 45–64: 5.0 ± 7.6; and 64–75: 4.7 ± 6.7; all P <.05).ConclusionThis analysis demonstrated significant differences in ED boarding times between races among psychiatric and ESI I admissions, gender, and age. This data provides insight into differences in ED boarding times among demographic groups and provides a focal point for examining possible factors contributing to the observed differences.

50 Emergency Department Management and Outcomes of COVID-19 Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure During the New York City Surge

Delays in intensive care unit (ICU) admission for critically ill patients are associated with worse outcomes, but the effect of “boarding” during the COVID-19 pandemic has not been well characterized. This study describes the emergency department (ED)-based care for patients presenting with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) to five hospitals in a large, academic health system during the initial surge in New York City, examining both respiratory modality choice and settings. For those managed with noninvasive respiratory support, we also aimed to explore the association between ED boarding time and patient morbidity and mortality. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED patients presenting from 3/1/2020 to 7/10/2020 with COVID-19-related AHRF and requiring ICU admission at any time during their hospitalization. Patient demographics, comorbidities, severity of illness (Mortality Probability Model III on admission), clinical course, including the use, settings (initial and changes), and duration of respiratory support modalities (ie, noninvasive ventilation [NIV], high flow nasal cannula [HFNC], invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV]), as well as hospital site, were collected through validated electronic query and standardized manual chart abstraction. AHRF severity was defined using a PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PF): 200-300 (mild), 100-199 (moderate), and <100 (severe). For patients without a PaO2, the PF was imputed using SpO2/FiO2 ratio using previously validated non-linear conversion. Boarding was defined as the time interval from ED request for admission to ED departure. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of ICU admission, intubation, or mortality within 48 hours of ED arrival. Descriptive analyses stratified by boarding duration and AHRF were completed. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to determine the association between ED boarding and the primary outcome. A total of 679 ED patients with COVID-19 AHRF required ICU admission during the study period. They were managed with low flow oxygen only (261, 38.4%), or with NIV (120, 17.7%), HF (51, 7.5%), and/or IMV (99, 14.6%), with setting ranges detailed in Table 1. Of the patients with a known PF ratio (N=418), 110 (26.35%) had mild, 34 (5.0%) had moderate, and 274 (40.4%) had severe AHRF. Of these patients, 279 (41.1%) had a change documented to their settings, with increased likelihood of adjustments with longer boarding time (p<0.001) and higher AHRF severity (p<0.001). Median boarding duration across all site was 9.5 hours (IQR 5.3-16.9 hours) with site variation. AHRF severity and support modality were not associated with differences of boarding time (p = 0.77 and p=0.54). Controlling for age, sex, race, and severity of illness, boarding time was not associated with worse patient outcomes in 48 hours (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.08, p=0.17) During the COVID-19 pandemic, critically ill patients presented to the ED and boarded for long periods of time, requiring prolonged ventilatory management. Despite the surge state and resource limitations, boarding times did not worsen post-ED outcomes for patients managed with non-invasive modalities.

Emergency Department-initiated High-flow Nasal Cannula for COVID-19 Respiratory Distress.

IntroductionPatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can develop rapidly progressive respiratory failure. Ventilation strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic seek to minimize patient mortality. In this study we examine associations between the availability of emergency department (ED)-initiated high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for patients presenting with COVID-19 respiratory distress and outcomes, including rates of endotracheal intubation (ETT), mortality, and hospital length of stay.MethodsWe performed a retrospective, non-concurrent cohort study of patients with COVID-19 respiratory distress presenting to the ED who required HFNC or ETT in the ED or within 24 hours following ED departure. Comparisons were made between patients presenting before and after the introduction of an ED-HFNC protocol.ResultsUse of HFNC was associated with a reduced rate of ETT in the ED (46.4% vs 26.3%, P <0.001) and decreased the cumulative proportion of patients who required ETT within 24 hours of ED departure (85.7% vs 32.6%, P <0.001) or during their entire hospitalization (89.3% vs 48.4%, P <0.001). Using HFNC was also associated with a trend toward increased survival to hospital discharge; however, this was not statistically significant (50.0% vs 68.4%, P = 0.115). There was no impact on intensive care unit or hospital length of stay. Demographics, comorbidities, and illness severity were similar in both cohorts.ConclusionsThe institution of an ED-HFNC protocol for patients with COVID-19 respiratory distress was associated with reductions in the rate of ETT. Early initiation of HFNC is a promising strategy for avoiding ETT and improving outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Factors associated with emergency department length of stay of internal medicine patients

Emergency Department (ED) Length Of Stay (ED-LOS) is associated with quality of care, patient safety and treatment outcome. The aim of this study is to identify factors associated with ED-LOS of internal medicine patients and provide recommendations to shorten ED-LOS. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a single center in the Netherlands. Anonymised data of 7,380 ED attendances from January 2016 to January 2018 were analyzed. Data included time of ED arrival and departure, sex, age, source of referral, triage category, first or consecutive visit and number of radiological examinations. Univariate analyses were used. Mean ED-LOS was 220 minutes. Factors which significantly prolonged ED-LOS were older age, source of referral, triage category, need for admission, first visit, number of radiological examinations, presentation in winter or spring and time of arrival (day and evening). Several patient and circumstantial factors are associated with ED-LOS. To shorten ED-LOS, we recommend to anticipate need for admission for older patients who arrive by ambulance and to create time slots in the radiology program and to restructure the morning report.

Predictors of Delayed Recognition of Critical Illness in Emergency Department Patients and Its Effect on Morbidity and Mortality

Timely recognition of critical illness is associated with improved outcomes, but is dependent on accurate triage, which is affected by system factors such as workload and staffing. We sought to first study the effect of delayed recognition on patient outcomes after controlling for system factors and then to identify potential predictors of delayed recognition. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Emergency Department (ED) patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) directly from the ED or within 48 hours of ED departure. Cohort characteristics were obtained through electronic and standardized chart abstraction. Operational metrics to estimate ED workload and volume using census data were matched to patients' ED stays. Delayed recognition of critical illness was defined as an absence of an ICU consult in the ED or declination of ICU admission by the ICU team. We employed entropy-balanced multivariate models to examine the association between delayed recognition and development of persistent organ dysfunction and/or death by hospitalization day 28 (POD+D), and multivariable regression modeling to identify factors associated with delayed recognition. Increased POD+D was seen for those with delayed recognition (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.13-2.92). When the delayed recognition was by the ICU team, the patient was 2.61 times more likely to experience POD+D compared to those for whom an ICU consult was requested and were accepted for admission. Lower initial severity of illness score (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.53) was predictive of delayed recognition. The odds for delayed recognition decreased when ED workload is higher (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.89) compared to times with lower ED workload. Increased POD+D is associated with delayed recognition. Patient and system factors such as severity of illness and ED workload influence the odds of delayed recognition of critical illness and need further exploration.

Impact of a standardized admissions process using a nurse intermediary

Objective: Transitions of care, including those between the Emergency Department (ED) and Internal Medicine (IM) for hospital admissions are complicated, variable processes that impact efficiency and patient safety. At our institution, a new, standardized admissions process that involved a nurse coordinator intermediary who served a dual role of facilitating admissions and overseeing bed board was implemented in July 2017. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the new process on ED throughput and safety outcomes of admitted patients.Methods: A retrospective analysis of the admissions process for patients at an urban, academic ED was conducted over a 4-month period preceding and following process implementation. ED metrics, including admission decision to ED departure time, were reviewed. In addition, the number of admitted patients upgraded to the intensive care unit (ICU) via a rapid response team (RRT-ICU) within 24 hours of admission and direct physician-physician handoffs were analyzed via surveys of both IM and EM physicians.Results: A total of 1,109 admissions were reviewed. The new admissions process resulted in a statistically significant decrease in boarding times for admitted ED patients (p = .03). The number of RRT-ICUs within 24 hours of admission did not change as a result of the intervention (p = .5). Direct physician handoffs increased, but not significantly, according to surveys of IM (p = .39) and EM physicians (p = .34).Conclusions: The implementation of a standardized admissions process utilizing a nurse intermediary improved provider communication and ED throughput without negatively impacting patient safety.

Influence of Overcrowding in the Emergency Department on Return Visit within 72 Hours.

This study was conducted to determine whether overcrowding in the emergency department (ED) affects the occurrence of a return visit (RV) within 72 h. The crowding indicator of index visit was the average number of total patients, patients under observation, and boarding patients during the first 1 and 4 h from ED arrival time and the last 1 h before ED departure. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine whether each indicator affects the occurrence of RV and post-RV admission. Of the 87,360 discharged patients, 3743 (4.3%) returned to the ED within 72 h. Of the crowding indicators pertaining to total patients, the last 1 h significantly affected decrease in RV (p = 0.0046). Boarding patients were found to increase RV occurrence during the first 1 h (p = 0.0146) and 4 h (p = 0.0326). Crowding indicators that increased the likelihood of admission post-RV were total number of patients during the first 1 h (p = 0.0166) and 4 h (p = 0.0335) and evaluating patients during the first 1 h (p = 0.0059). Overcrowding in the ED increased the incidence of RV and likelihood of post-RV admission. However, overcrowding at the time of ED departure was related to reduced RV.

Boarding is Associated with Reduced Emergency Department Efficiency that is not Mitigated by a Provider in Triage.

IntroductionBoarding of patients in the emergency department (ED) is associated with decreased ED efficiency. The provider-in-triage (PIT) model has been shown to improve ED throughput, but it is unclear how these improvements are affected by boarding. We sought to assess the effects of boarding on ED throughput and whether implementation of a PIT model mitigated those effects.MethodsWe performed a multi-site retrospective review of 955 days of ED operations data at a tertiary care academic ED (AED) and a high-volume community ED (CED) before and after implementation of PIT. Key outcome variables were door to provider time (D2P), total length of stay of discharged patients (LOSD), and boarding time (admit request to ED departure [A2D]).ResultsImplementation of PIT was associated with a decrease in median D2P by 22 minutes or 43% at the AED (p < 0.01), and 18 minutes (31%) at the CED (p < 0.01). LOSD also decreased by 19 minutes (5.9%) at the AED and 8 minutes (3.3%) at the CED (p<0.01). After adjusting for variations in daily census, the effect of boarding (A2D) on D2P and LOSD was unchanged, despite the implementation of PIT. At the AED, 7.7 minutes of boarding increased median D2P by one additional minute (p < 0.01), and every four minutes of boarding increased median LOSD by one minute (p < 0.01). At the CED, 7.1 minutes of boarding added one additional minute to D2P (p < 0.01), and 4.8 minutes of boarding added one minute to median LOSD (p < 0.01).ConclusionIn this retrospective, observational multicenter study, ED operational efficiency was improved with the implementation of a PIT model but worsened with boarding. The PIT model was unable to mitigate any of the effects of boarding. This suggests that PIT is associated with increased efficiency of ED intake and throughput, but boarding continues to have the same effect on ED efficiency regardless of upstream efficiency measures that may be designed to minimize its impact.

Sedation Patterns and Hyperosmolar Therapy in Emergency Departments were Associated with Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes in Patients with Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage.

Background:Spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) is associated with high mortality. Little information exists to guide initial resuscitation in the emergency department (ED) setting. However, blood pressure variability (BPV) and mechanical ventilation (MV) are known risk factors for poor outcome in sICH.Objectives:The objective was to examine the associations between BPV and MV in ED (EDMV) and between two ED interventions – post-MV sedation and hyperosmolar therapy for elevated intracranial pressure – and BPV in the ED and in-hospital mortality.Methods:We retrospectively studied adults with sICH and external ventricular drainage who were transferred to a quaternary academic medical center from other hospitals between January 2011 and September 2015. We used multivariable linear and logistic regressions to measure associations between clinical factors, BPV, and outcomes.Results:We analyzed ED records from 259 patients. There were 143 (55%) EDMV patients who had more severe clinical factors and significantly higher values of all BPV indices than NoEDMV patients. Two clinical factors and none of the severity scores (i.e., Hunt and Hess, World Federation of Neurological Surgeons Grades, ICH score) correlated with BPV. Hyperosmolarity therapy without fluid resuscitation positively correlated with all BPV indices, whereas propofol infusion plus a narcotic negatively correlated with one of them. Two BPV indices, i.e., successive variation of blood pressure (BPSV) and absolute difference in blood pressure between ED triage and departure (BPDepart − Triage), were significantly associated with increased mortality rate.Conclusion:Patients receiving MV had significantly higher BPV, perhaps related to disease severity. Good ED sedation, hyperosmolar therapy, and fluid resuscitation were associated with less BPV and lower likelihood of death.

Associations Between Crowding and Ten-Day Mortality Among Patients Allocated Lower Triage Acuity Levels Without Need of Acute Hospital Care on Departure From the Emergency Department

We describe the association between emergency department (ED) crowding and 10-day mortality for patients triaged to lower acuity levels at ED arrival and without need of acute hospital care on ED departure. This was a registry study based on ED visits with all patients aged 18 years or older, with triage acuity levels 3 to 5, and without need of acute hospital care on ED departure during 2009 to 2016 (n=705,699). The sample was divided into patients surviving (n=705,076) or dying (n=623) within 10 days. Variables concerning patient characteristics and measures of ED crowding (mean length of stay and ED occupancy ratio) were extracted from the hospital's electronic health records. ED length of stay per ED visit was estimated by the average length of stay for all patients who presented to the ED during the same day and shift and with the same acuity level. The 10-day mortality after ED discharge was used as the outcome measure. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. The 10-day mortality rate was 0.09% (n=623). The event group had larger proportions of patients aged 80 years or older (51.4% versus 7.7%) and triaged with acuity level 3 (63.3% versus 35.6%), and greater comorbidity (age-combined Charlson comorbidity index median interquartile range 6 versus 0). We observed an increased 10-day mortality for patients with a mean ED length of stay greater than or equal to 8 hours versus less than 2 hours (adjusted odds ratio 5.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.15 to 15.94) and for elevated ED occupancy ratio. Adjusted odds ratios for ED occupancy ratio quartiles 2, 3, and 4 versus quartile 1 were 1.48 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.92), 1.63 (95% CI 1.24 to 2.14), and 1.53 (95% CI 1.15 to 2.03), respectively. Patients assigned to lower triage acuity levels when arriving to the ED and without need of acute hospital care on departure from the ED had higher 10-day mortality when the mean ED length of stay exceeded 8 hours and when ED occupancy ratio increased.

Assessing adequacy of emergency provider documentation among interhospital transferred patients with acute aortic dissection

Acute aortic dissection (AoD) is a hypertensive emergency often requiring the transfer of patients to higher care hospitals; thus, clinical care documentation and compliance with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) is crucial. The study assessed emergency providers (EP) documentation of clinical care and EMTALA compliance among interhospital transferred AoD patients. This retrospective study examined adult patients transferred directly from a referring emergency department (ED) to a quaternary academic center between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2015. The primary outcome was the percentage of records with adequate documentation of clinical care (ADoCC). The secondary outcome was the percentage of records with adequate documentation of EMTALA compliance (ADoEMTALA). There were 563 electronically identified patients with 287 included in the final analysis. One hundred and five (36.6%) patients had ADoCC while 166 (57.8%) patients had ADoEMTALA. Patients with inadequate documentation of EMTALA (IDoEMTALA) were associated with a higher likelihood of not meeting the American Heart Association (AHA) ED Departure SBP guideline (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.03-3.2, P=0.04). Male gender, handwritten type of documentation, and transport by air were associated with an increased risk of inadequate documentation of clinical care (IDoCC), while receiving continuous infusion was associated with higher risk of IDoEMTALA. Documentation of clinical care and EMTALA compliance by Emergency Providers is poor. Inadequate EMTALA documentation was associated with a higher likelihood of patients not meeting the AHA ED Departure SBP guideline. Therefore, Emergency Providers should thoroughly document clinical care and EMTALA compliance among this critically ill group before transfer.

Assessment of the Feasibility of automated, real-time clinical decision support in the emergency department using electronic health record data

BackgroundThe use of big data and machine learning within clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) has the potential to transform medicine through better prognosis, diagnosis and automation of tasks. Real-time application of machine learning algorithms, however, is dependent on data being present and entered prior to, or at the point of, CDSS deployment. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of automating CDSSs within electronic health records (EHRs) by investigating the timing, data categorization, and completeness of documentation of their individual components of two common Clinical Decision Rules (CDRs) in the Emergency Department.MethodsThe CURB-65 severity score and HEART score were randomly selected from a list of the top emergency medicine CDRs. Emergency department (ED) visits with ICD-9 codes applicable to our CDRs were eligible. The charts were reviewed to determine the categorization components of the CDRs as structured and/or unstructured, median times of documentation, portion of charts with all data components documented as structured data, portion of charts with all structured CDR components documented before ED departure. A kappa score was calculated for interrater reliability.ResultsThe components of the CDRs were mainly documented as structured data for the CURB-65 severity score and HEART score. In the CURB-65 group, 26.8% of charts had all components documented as structured data, and 67.8% in the HEART score. Documentation of some CDR components often occurred late for both CDRs. Only 21 and 11% of patients had all CDR components documented as structured data prior to ED departure for the CURB-65 and HEART score groups, respectively. The interrater reliability for the CURB-65 score review was 0.75 and 0.65 for the HEART score.ConclusionOur study found that EHRs may be unable to automatically calculate popular CDRs—such as the CURB-65 severity score and HEART score—due to missing components and late data entry.

Emergency department boarding and adverse hospitalization outcomes among patients admitted to a general medical service

ObjectiveOvercrowding in the emergency department (ED) has been associated with patient harm, yet little is known about the association between ED boarding and adverse hospitalization outcomes. We sought to examine the association between ED boarding and three common adverse hospitalization outcomes: rapid response team activation (RRT), escalation in care, and mortality. MethodWe conducted an observational analysis of consecutive patient encounters admitted from the ED to the general medical service between February 2013 and June 2015. This study was conducted in an urban, academic hospital with an annual adult ED census over 90,000. We defined boarding as patients with greater than 4h from ED bed order to ED departure to hospital ward. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse outcomes in the first 24h of admission, including RRT activation, care escalation to intensive care, or in-hospital mortality. ResultsA total of 31,426 patient encounters were included of which 3978 (12.7%) boarded in the ED for 4h or more. Adverse outcomes occurred in 1.92% of all encounters. Comparing boarded vs. non-boarded patients, 41 (1.03%) vs. 244 (0.90%) patients experienced a RRT activation, 53 (1.33%) vs. 387 (1.42%) experienced a care escalation, and 1 (0.03%) vs.12 (0.04%) experienced unanticipated in-hospital death, within 24h of ED admission. In unadjusted analysis, there was no difference in the composite outcome between boarding and non-boarding patients (1.91% vs. 1.91%, p=0.994). Regression analysis adjusted for patient demographics, acuity, and comorbidities also showed no association between boarding and the primary outcome. A sensitivity analysis showed an association between ED boarding and the composite outcome inclusive of the entire inpatient hospital stay (5.8% vs. 4.7%, p=0.003). ConclusionWithin the first 24h of hospital admission to a general medicine service, adverse hospitalization outcomes are rare and not associated with ED boarding.

Does the U Stand for Useless? The Urine Drug Screen and Emergency Department Psychiatric Patients

BackgroundBehavioral emergencies account for a significant portion of emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. Substance abuse is common in this population and may precipitate or exacerbate preexisting psychiatric illness. Contrary to ED policy guidelines, many behavior health centers (BH) require a urine drug screen (UDS) in stable patients prior to transfer. ObjectiveWe sought to determine the role of the UDS in ED length of stay (LOS), cost, and charges to patients and inpatient psychiatric care. MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of all patients transferred to an in-network BH from September 1–30, 2014. Clinical data were extracted and analyzed from our electronic medical record, including records from both the ED visit and the BH stay. ResultsThere were 205 patient encounters identified; 89 patients had a UDS performed in the ED and 89% were obtained after the ED medical clearance. LOS were similar between the two groups, however, time to ED departure from time of medical clearance was delayed in the UDS group. BH providers mentioned UDS results < 25% of the time and no confirmatory tests were performed. There was no difference in BH LOS or discharge diagnosis of substance-abuse disorder. Patient charges for UDS over the month totaled $21,093. ConclusionThe UDS did not seem to have any significant effect on inpatient psychiatric care; whereas ED LOS and cost were both negatively affected. Based on these results, the UDS seems to be of little-to-no benefit in the setting of acute psychiatric illness.

Emergency Department Holding Orders

BackgroundHolding orders help transition admitted emergency department (ED) patients to hospital beds. ObjectiveTo describe the effect of ED holding orders. MethodsWe conducted a single-site retrospective study of ward admissions from the ED to the hospital internal medicine (HIM) service over 2 years. Patients were classified based on whether the ED did (group 1) or did not (group 2) write holding orders; group 1 was subdivided into patients sent to the floor with only ED holding orders (group 1A) vs. with subsequent HIM admission orders (group 1B). Outcomes were ED length of stay (LOS), time from decision to admit to ED departure (D→D), transfer to a higher level of care within 6 h (potential undertriage), and discharge from admission ward within 12 h (potential overtriage). ResultsThere were 9501 admissions: 6642 in group 1 (2369 in group 1A and 4273 in group 1B) and 2859 in group 2. Reductions in mean LOS between groups (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs] of the differences) were as follows: group 1 vs. 2: 44 min (39–49 min); group 1A vs. 1B, 48 min (43–53 min); group 1B vs. 2: 27 min (22–32 min); group 1A vs. 2: 75 min (69–81 min). Mean D→D was shorter in group 1A than 1B by 43 min (40–45 min). Holding orders were not associated with increases in potential undertriage or overtriage. ConclusionsED holding orders were associated with improved ED throughput, without evidence of undertriage or overtriage. This work supports the use of holding orders as a safe and effective means to improve ED patient flow.