Emergency Departments In England Research Articles

Variation in attendance at emergency departments in England across local areas: A system under unequal pressure

BackgroundCrowding in Accident and Emergency Departments (AEDs) and long waiting times are critical issues contributing to adverse patient outcomes and system inefficiencies. These challenges are exacerbated by varying levels of AED attendance across different local areas, which may reflect underlying disparities in primary care provision and population characteristics. MethodWe used regression analysis to determine how much variation across local areas in England of attendance at emergency departments remained after controlling for population risk factors and alternative urgent care provision. FindingsThere is substantial residual variation of the order of 3 to 1 (highest to lowest) in per person attendance rate across different areas. This is not related to in-hospital capacity as proxied by the per person number of hospital emergency doctors in an area. ConclusionSome areas in England have emergency departments that are under much greater pressure than others, and this cannot be explained in terms of their population characteristics or the availability of alternative treatment options. It is imperative to better understand the drivers of this variation so that effective interventions to address utilisation can be designed.

Care gaps among people presenting to the hospital following self-harm: observational study of three emergency departments in England

ObjectivesThis study aims to examine the proportions of patients referred to mental health, social and voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) services and general practice and to assess care gaps...

Retaining doctors in emergency medicine: an ethnographic study of emergency departments in England

ObjectivesTo gain a deep understanding of factors driving retention in emergency medicine. To understand in detail the day-to-day lived experience of emergency medicine doctors, to identify and explore factors influencing...

“I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE”: THE EXPERIENCE OF BEING MANAGED FOR SUSPECTED CAUDA EQUINA SYNDROME IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

Purpose and backgroundCauda equina syndrome (CES) leads to nerve compression in the lumbar spine, and requires immediate treatment to prevent permanent neurological dysfunction, including urinary/anorectal incontinence. The consequences for the patient are significant as, in the decade to 2018, CES has cost the NHS £186,134,049. No study has reported patients’ experiences of being managed with suspected CES in an emergency department (ED), and this study explores patients’ experiences and how the NHS can optimise care for patients experiencing this condition.Methods and ResultsIn this qualitative secondary analysis, 14 participants (aged 23–63 years) with suspected CES were purposively sampled from 4 EDs in England. Online, semi-structed interviews were undertaken (in 2021, during the pandemic), and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were managed using a Framework approach and analysed thematically.Three themes were identified: quality of care; environmental factors; and expectations. The quality of care included managing uncertainty, the importance of communication, appropriate assessment and follow-up care. Environmental factors, including the chairs, waiting times and the busy nature of the ED, negatively impacted patients’ experiences. Furthermore, an expectation gap was identified, as most individuals came to the ED expecting to receive a scan, an accurate diagnosis and a cure. Despite frustrations, patients expressed gratitude towards the ED staff.ConclusionThis study highlights the importance of empathically acknowledging the patient's pain and providing comprehensive assessments and management plans for people attending ED with suspected CES. Optimising the ED environment to minimise patients’ pain and distress while waiting to access care is paramount and overdue.No conflicts of interest Sources of fundingFunding for primary data: Health Education England & National Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

“I JUST WANTED TO GET THE PAIN OUT OF THE WAY”: WHY PEOPLE WITH SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS OF SUSPECTED CAUDA EQUINA SYNDROME ATTEND THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

Purpose and backgroundCauda Equina Syndrome (CES), a rare (<1 per 100,000) and potentially devasting condition, involves compression of the lumbosacral nerve roots. If not quickly identified and treated, it can lead to lasting disability, and high medicolegal costs (>£186 million in the decade to 2018). This study identified why people with suspected CES attend the emergency department (ED) and explored any delays in attending.Methods and ResultsThe design was a secondary analysis of a qualitative dataset comprising patients with back pain who attended the ED, undertaken using an interpretivist approach. Fourteen patients (8M:6F, aged 23–63 years) with suspected CES were purposively sampled from 4 EDs (2 Northern and 2 Southern) in England between August and December 2021. Semi-structured interviews were conducted online, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.Acopia with pain was the biggest factor in a participant's decision to attend the ED, along with the need for a diagnosis. This pain was the worst ever experienced and debilitating, leaving people unable to cope and desperate for relief. 12/14 were advised to attend the ED following identification of red flags by: GPs (n=9); physiotherapists (n=2); surgical colleague (n=1); and 111 (n=1). Factors such as guilt, previous experience of being disregarded, and symptom misattribution were seen to cause delays in seeking care.ConclusionThis paper revealed a disconnect between the priorities of patients and clinicians prior to attending the ED. Clinicians need to validate the pain experience, communicate clearly why signs and symptoms are concerning, and convey the urgency and potential impact of CES.Conflicts of interestNoneSources of fundingFunding for primary data: Health Education England & NationalInstitute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

“GO AND GET IT CHECKED”: EXPLORING THE DECISION TO ATTEND THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT FOR LOW BACK PAIN

Purpose and backgroundLow back pain burdens individuals, society and services, including Emergency Departments (ED), straining services and prolonging wait times. Despite reported personal influences on deciding to attend ED, the role of third-party advice remains underexplored. Sparse guidance for clinicians and service-users highlights the need for effective back pain management strategies, to alleviate system pressure and optimise patient outcomes. This study explored how advice influences the decision to attend the ED for back pain.Methods and ResultsFrom a subtle realist stance, the design was a secondary analysis of qualitative data, where 47 patients (26M:21F, aged 23–79 years) with back pain were purposively sampled from four EDs (2 Northern and 2 Southern) in England between August and December 2021. Eight patients had previously visited ED for this episode of back pain. As this was during the pandemic, semi-structured interviews were conducted online, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a reflective thematic analysis.Three themes were identified as crucial in making the decision to attend ED: The Healthcare professional; Trusted others; and the Individual. Healthcare professionals often dictated decisions, leaving participants feeling powerless. Trusted others provided varying support levels, often acting as allies. Individuals grappled with anxieties around their condition and treatment expectations.ConclusionThis study highlights the need for clinicians to provide clarity and guidance to individuals and their Trusted others, seeking advice regarding escalation to visit the ED with back pain. There was evidence that worrying about pain was a significant motivator for attending ED, resulting in malalignment with current practice guidelines.No conflicts of interest Sources of fundingFunding for primary data: Health Education England & National Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

Psychometric validation of a patient-reported experience measure for older adults attending the emergency department: the PREM-ED 65 study

IntroductionOptimising emergency department (ED) patient experience is vital to ensure care quality. However, there are few validated instruments to measure the experiences of specific patient groups, including older adults. We...

Free-for-all: Does crowding impact outcomes because hospital emergency departments do not prioritise effectively?

Unexpected peaks in volumes of attendances at hospital emergency departments (EDs) have been found to affect waiting times, intensity of care and outcomes. We ask whether these effects of ED crowding on patients are caused by poor clinical prioritisation or a quality-quantity trade-off generated by a binding capacity constraint. We study the effects of crowding created by lower-severity patients on the outcomes of approximately 13 million higher-severity patients attending the 140 public EDs in England between April 2016 and March 2017. Our identification approach relies on high-dimensional fixed effects to account for planned capacity. Unexpected demand from low-severity patients has very limited effects on the care provided to higher-severity patients throughout their entire pathway in ED. Detrimental effects of crowding caused by low-severity patients materialise only at very high levels of unexpected demand, suggesting that binding resource constraints impact patient care only when demand greatly exceeds the ED's expectations. These effects are smaller than those caused by crowding induced by higher-severity patients, suggesting an efficient prioritisation of incoming patients in EDs.

Outcomes for university students following emergency care presentation for deliberate self-harm: a retrospective observational study of emergency departments in England for 2017/2018

ObjectivesIdentify university-aged students and contrast their healthcare provision and outcomes with other patients in the same age group attending emergency departments for deliberate self-harm.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional observational study.SettingPatients visiting 129 public...

Comparing physician associates and foundation year 1 doctors-in-training undertaking emergency medicine consultations in England: a quantitative study of outcomes

ObjectivesTo compare the contribution of physician associates (PAs) to the outcomes of emergency medicine consultations with that of foundation year 1 doctors-in-training (FY1s).DesignA quantitative study using retrospective chart review of...

Emergency Department Buprenorphine Quality Improvement and Emergency Physician Knowledge, Attitudes, and Self-Efficacy.

Buprenorphine is an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder that is underused in the emergency department (ED). In this study we evaluated changes in emergency physician knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy regarding buprenorphine prescribing and working with patients who use drugs after implementation of an ED buprenorphine quality improvement (QI) initiative. An anonymous, online survey was administered to emergency physicians staffing four EDs in New England in 2019 and 2020 before and after an ED QI initiative. Survey questions included novel and previously validated questions to assess confidence, knowledge, self-efficacy, and attitudes about buprenorphine and working with patients who use drugs. Confidence, self-efficacy, and attitude responses were assessed on a Likert scale. Participants received a gift card for survey completion. We analyzed pre- and post- survey responses descriptively and compared them using t-tests. Using logistic regression we evaluated the factors associated with buprenorphine prescribing. Of 95 emergency physicians, 56 (58.9% response rate) completed the pre-intervention survey and 60 (63.2%) completed the post-survey. There was an increase in the number of X-waivered adult emergency physicians and ED buprenorphine prescribing after program implementation. Physician confidence increased from a mean of 3.4 (SD 0.8) to 3.9 (SD 0.7; scale 1-5, p < 0.01). Knowledge about buprenorphine increased from a mean score of 1.4 (SD 0.7) to 1.7 (SD 0.5, p < 0.01). Physician attitudes and self-efficacy did not change. Post-initiative, increased confidence was associated with higher odds of buprenorphine prescribing (odds ratio 4.4; 95% confidence interval 1.07-18.4). After an ED QI initiative, buprenorphine prescribing in the ED increased, as did both physician confidence in working with patients who use drugs and their knowledge of buprenorphine. Increased confidence was associated with higher odds of buprenorphine prescribing and should be a focus of future, buprenorphine implementation strategies in the ED.

Hospital-Level Implementation Barriers, Facilitators, and Willingness to Use a New Regional Disaster Teleconsultation System: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

The Region 1 Disaster Health Response System project is developing new telehealth capabilities to provide rapid, temporary access to clinical experts across US jurisdictions to support regional disaster health response. To guide future implementation, we identified hospital-level barriers, facilitators, and willingness to use a novel regional peer-to-peer disaster teleconsultation system for disaster health response. We used the National Emergency Department Inventory-USA database to identify all 189 hospital-based and freestanding emergency departments (EDs) in New England states. We digitally or telephonically surveyed emergency managers regarding notification systems used for large-scale no-notice emergency events, access to consultants in 6 disaster-relevant specialties, disaster credentialing requirements before system use, reliability and redundancy of internet or cellular service, and willingness to use a disaster teleconsultation system. We examined state-wise hospital and ED disaster response capability. Overall, 164 (87%) hospitals and EDs responded-126 (77%) completed telephone surveys. Most (n=148, 90%) receive emergency notifications from state-based systems. Forty (24%) hospitals and EDs lacked access to burn specialists; toxicologists, 30 (18%); radiation specialists, 25 (15%); and trauma specialists, 20 (12%). Among critical access hospitals (CAHs) or EDs with <10,000 annual visits (n=36), 92% received routine nondisaster telehealth services but lacked toxicologist (25%), burn (22%), and radiation (17%) specialist access. Most hospitals and EDs (n=115, 70%) require disaster credentialing of teleconsultants before system use. Among 113 hospitals and EDs with written disaster credentialing procedures, 28% expected completing disaster credentialing within 24 hours, and 55% within 25-72 hours, which varied by state. Most (n=154, 94%) reported adequate internet or cellular service for video-streaming; 81% maintained cellular service despite internet disruption. Fewer rural hospitals and EDs reported reliable internet or cellular service (19/22, 86% vs 135/142, 95%) and ability to maintain cellular service with internet disruption (11/19, 58% vs 113/135, 84%) than urban hospitals and EDs. Overall, 133 (81%) were somewhat or very likely to use a regional disaster teleconsultation system. Large-volume EDs (annual visits ≥40,000) were less likely to use the service than smaller ones; all CAHs and nearly all rural hospitals or freestanding EDs were likely to use disaster consultation services. Among hospitals and EDs somewhat or very unlikely to use the system (n=26), sufficient consultant access (69%) and reluctance to use new technology or systems (27%) were common barriers. Potential delays (19%), liability (19%), privacy (15%), and hospital information system security restrictions (15%) were infrequent concerns. Most New England hospitals and EDs have access to state emergency notification systems, telecommunication infrastructure, and willingness to use a new regional disaster teleconsultation system. System developers should focus on ways to improve telecommunication redundancy in rural areas and use low-bandwidth technology to maintain service availability to CAHs and rural hospitals and EDs. Policies and procedures to accelerate and standardize disaster credentialing are needed for implementation across jurisdictions.

Characteristics of acute sexual assault care in New England emergency departments.

Interventions such as written protocols and sexual assault nurse examiner programs improve outcomes for patients who have experienced acute sexual assault. How widely and in what ways such interventions have been implemented is largely unknown. We sought to characterize the current state of acute sexual assault care in New England. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of individuals acute with knowledge of emergency department (ED) operations in relation tosexual assault care at New England adult EDs. Our primary outcomesincluded the availability and coverage of dedicated and non-dedicated sexual assault forensic examiners in EDs. Secondary outcomes included frequency of and reasons for patient transfer; treatment before transfer; availability of written sexual assault protocols; characteristics and scope of practice of dedicated and non-dedicated sexual assault forensic examiners (SAFEs), provision of care in SAFEs' absence; availability, coverage, and characteristics of victim advocacy and follow-up resources; and barriers to and facilitators of care. We approached all 186 distinct adult EDs in New England to recruit participants; 92 (49.5%) individuals participated, most commonly physician medical directors (n=34, 44.1%). Two thirds of participants reported they at times have access to a dedicated (n=52, 65%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 54.5%-75.5%) or non-dedicated (n=50, 64.1%; 95% CI, 53.5%-74.7%) SAFE, but fewer reported always having this access (n=9, 17.3%; 95% CI, 7%-27.6%; n=13, 26%; 95% CI, 13.8%-38.2%). We describe in detail findings related to our secondary outcomes. Although SAFEs are recognized as a strategy to provide high-quality acute sexual assault care, their availability and coverage is limited.

Evaluating the impact of a pulse oximetry remote monitoring programme on mortality and healthcare utilisation in patients with COVID-19 assessed in emergency departments in England: a retrospective matched cohort study

BackgroundTo identify the impact of enrolment onto a national pulse oximetry remote monitoring programme for COVID-19 (COVID-19 Oximetry @home; CO@h) on health service use and mortality in patients attending Emergency...

Evaluating the provision of paediatric liaison psychiatry services in England.

Liaison psychiatry provision for children and young people in England is poorly evaluated. We sought to evaluate paediatric liaison psychiatry provision and develop recommendations to improve practice. The liaison psychiatry surveys of England (LPSE) cross-sectional surveys engage all liaison psychiatry services in England. Services are systematically identified by contacting all acute hospitals with emergency departments in England. Questions are developed in consultation with NHS England and the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Faculty of Liaison Psychiatry, and updated based on feedback. Responses are submitted by email, post or telephone. Questions on paediatric services were included from 2015 (LPSE-2), and we analysed data from this and the subsequent four surveys. The number of acute hospitals with access to paediatric liaison psychiatry services increased from 29 (15.9%) in 2015 to 46 (26.6%) in 2019, compared with 100% provision for adults. For LPSE-4, only one site met the Core-24 criteria of 11 full-time equivalent mental health practitioners and 1.5 full-time equivalent consultants, and for LPSE-5, just two sites exceeded them. Acute hospitals with access to 24/7 paediatric liaison psychiatry services increased from 12 to 19% between LPSE-4 and LPSE-5. The proportion of paediatric liaison psychiatry services based offsite decreased from 30 to 24%. There is an unacceptable under-provision of paediatric liaison psychiatry services compared with provision for adults. Number of services, staffing levels and hours of operation have increased, but continued improvement is required, as few services meet the Core-24 criteria.

Suicidal Crisis among Children and Young People: Associations with Adverse Childhood Experiences and Socio-Demographic Factors.

Suicide is a major public health issue and a leading cause of death among children and young people (CYP) worldwide. There is strong evidence linking adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) to an increased risk of suicidal behaviours in adults, but there is limited understanding regarding ACEs and suicidal crises in CYP. This study aims to examine the ACEs associated with CYP presenting at Emergency Departments for suicidal crises, and specifically the factors associated with repeat attendances. This is a case series study of CYP (aged 8-16) experiencing suicidal crisis who presented in a paediatric Emergency Department in England between March 2019 and March 2021 (n = 240). The dataset was subjected to conditional independence graphical analysis. Results revealed a significant association between suicidal crisis and several ACEs. Specifically, evidence of clusters of ACE variables suggests two distinct groups of CYP associated with experiencing a suicidal crisis: those experiencing "household risk" and those experiencing "parental risk". Female sex, history of self-harm, mental health difficulties, and previous input from mental health services were also associated with repeat hospital attendances. Findings have implications for early identification of and intervention with children who may be at a heightened risk for ACEs and associated suicidal crises.

Cessation of smoking trial in the emergency department (CoSTED): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

IntroductionAttendees of emergency departments (EDs) have a higher than expected prevalence of smoking. ED attendance may be a good opportunity to prompt positive behaviour change, even for smokers not currently...

General practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department: the GPED mixed-methods study

BackgroundEmergency care is facing a steadily rising demand. In response, hospitals have implemented new models of care that locate general practitioners in or alongside the emergency department.ObjectivesWe aimed to explore the effects of general practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department on patient care, the primary care and acute hospital team, and the wider system, as well as to determine the differential effects of different service models.DesignThis was a mixed-methods study in three work packages. Work package A classified current models of general practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department in England. We interviewed national and local leaders, staff and patients to identify the hypotheses underpinning these services. Work package B used a retrospective analysis of routinely available data. Outcome measures included waiting times, admission rates, reattendances, mortality and the number of patient attendances. We explored potential cost savings. Work package C was a detailed mixed-methods case study in 10 sites. We collected and synthesised qualitative and quantitative data from non-participant observations, interviews and a workforce survey. Patients and the public were involved throughout the development, delivery and dissemination of the study.ResultsHigh-level goals were shared between national policy-makers and local leads; however, there was disagreement about the anticipated effects. We identified eight domains of influence: performance against the 4-hour target, use of investigations, hospital admissions, patient outcome and experience, service access, workforce recruitment and retention, workforce behaviour and experience, and resource use. General practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department were associated with a very slight reduction in the rate of reattendance within 7 days; however, the clinical significance of this was judged to be negligible. For all other indicators, there was no effect on performance or outcomes. However, there was a substantial degree of heterogeneity in these findings. This is explained by the considerable variation observed in our case study sites, and the sensitivity of service implementation to local factors. The effects on the workforce were complex; they were often positive for emergency department doctors and general practitioners, but less so for nursing staff. The patient-streaming process generated stress and conflict for emergency department nurses and general practitioners. Patients and carers were understanding of general practitioners working in or alongside the emergency department. We found no evidence that staff concerns regarding the potential to create additional demand were justified. Any possible cost savings associated with reduced reattendances were heavily outweighed by the cost of the service.LimitationsThe reliability of our data sources varied and we were unable to complete our quantitative analysis entirely as planned. Participation in interviews and at case study sites was voluntary.ConclusionsService implementation was highly subject to local context and micro-level influences. Key success factors were interprofessional working, staffing and training, streaming, and infrastructure and support.Future workFurther research should study the longer-term effects of these services, clinician attitudes to risk and the implementation of streaming. Additional work should also examine the system effects of national policy initiatives, develop methodologies to support rapid service evaluation and study the relationship between primary and secondary care.Trial registrationThis trial is registered as ISRCTN51780222.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full inHealth and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 30. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Realist analysis of whether emergency departments with primary care services generate ‘provider-induced demand’

BackgroundIt is not known whether emergency departments (EDs) with primary care services influence demand for non-urgent care (‘provider-induced demand’). We proposed that distinct primary care services in EDs encourages primary care demand, whereas primary care integrated within EDs may be less likely to cause additional demand. We aimed to explore this and explain contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) influencing demand.MethodsWe used realist evaluation methodology and observed ED service delivery. Twenty-four patients and 106 staff members (including Clinical Directors and General Practitioners) were interviewed at 13 EDs in England and Wales (240 hours of observations across 30 days). Field notes from observations and interviews were analysed by creating ‘CMO’ configurations to develop and refine theories relating to drivers of demand.ResultsEDs with distinct primary care services were perceived to attract demand for primary care because services were visible, known or enabled direct access to health care services. Other influencing factors included patients’ experiences of accessing primary care, community care capacity, service design and population characteristics.ConclusionsPatient, local-system and wider-system factors can contribute to additional demand at EDs that include primary care services. Our findings can inform service providers and policymakers in developing strategies to limit the effect of potential influences on additional demand when demand exceeds capacity.

Clinical features associated with ADB-BUTINACA exposure in patients attending emergency departments in England

Objective Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRA) are commonly encountered new psychoactive substances. Here we report the recent detection of ADB-BUTINACA in samples from patients attending United Kingdom emergency departments with toxicity after suspected drug misuse and describe the associated clinical features. Methods Consenting adults (≥16 y) presenting to participating hospitals with toxicity after suspected drug misuse have been included in the Identification Of Novel psychoActive substances (IONA) study since March 2015. Demographic and clinical features are recorded and blood and/or urine samples analysed using high-resolution accurate mass liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Results By December 2021, analytical data were available for 1279 IONA participants and ADB-BUTINACA was detected in at least one sample from 10 (9 males, age range 16–51 median 45 years), all presenting since February 2021. Smoking ‘spice’ was reported by four patients, two had ingested edible “cannabis” gums and four reported heroin use (2 intravenous, 1 smoked, 1 route not known). Co-use of pregabalin (oral) and crack cocaine (smoked) were also reported. In 3 cases ADB-BUTINACA was the only substance detected, while in seven other substances of misuse were also detected including other SCRA, opioids, benzodiazepines cocaine and pregabalin. Clinical features reported in these 2 groups respectively included reduced level of consciousness (3/3, 6/7), agitation (0/3, 4/7), tachycardia (0/3, 3/7), seizures (1/3, 1/7), hallucinations (1/3, 1/7), hypotension (1/3, 1/7). Metabolic acidosis (1/3, 0/7) and respiratory acidosis (1/3, 0/7), All 10 patients recovered with supportive care, including intubation and ventilation for one case. The median length of hospital stay was 19 h (range 2.6–131 h). Conclusions ADB-BUTINACA has recently emerged as a drug of misuse in England. Clinical features of toxicity are consistent with those of other SCRA and include reduced level of consciousness, respiratory and/or metabolic acidosis, seizures, confusion and hallucinations.