Association between pain control and patient satisfaction outcomes in the emergency department setting.

OBJECTIVE: Pain management and patient satisfaction are key markers for health systems performance. There is a lack of consensus on the role of analgesia, its adequacy, and its links to patient satisfaction in the ED. The present study aimed to assess the relationship between adequacy of analgesia and patient satisfaction in the ED setting. METHODS: Consenting adult patients (n = 115) presenting to the ED with pain were enrolled, and their pain tracked throughout admission with 11 point numerical pain scores. Eleven point numerical scores were also utilised to measure satisfaction and compassion at the end of each ED stay. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction score ≥7. RESULTS: Of 115 enrolled patients, 94 (81.7%) were eligible for analysis. Median time to physician evaluation was 54.0 min (inter-quartile range [IQR] 35.0-98.0) and median ED length of stay was 205 min (IQR 129.0-280.0). Fifty-four patients (57.5%) received analgesia during their stay, of whom 36 (38.3%) had a significant response to analgesia (≥2 change in pain score). Median time to analgesia was 87.5 min (IQR 66.1-108.9). Patient satisfaction was inversely associated with male sex, and positively correlated (Spearman's rank correlation P < 0.05) with increasing age, significant change in pain score (±2) and compassion scores. CONCLUSION: In the present study of patients presenting to the ED with pain, oligoanalgesia remains a significant issue. Male sex was inversely associated with satisfaction, whereas compassion, and significant change in pain score were associated with improved patient satisfaction. Of the factors analysed, staff compassion demonstrated the strongest correlation with satisfaction.

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome-based severe sepsis screening algorithms in emergency department patients with suspected sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS)-based severe sepsis screening algorithms have been utilised in stratification and initiation of early broad spectrum antibiotics for patients presenting to EDs with suspected sepsis. We aimed to investigate the performance of some of these algorithms on a cohort of suspected sepsis patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis on an ED-based prospective sepsis registry at a tertiary Sydney hospital, Australia. Definitions for sepsis were based on the 2012 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Numerical values for SIRS criteria and ED investigation results were recorded at the trigger of sepsis pathway on the registry. Performance of specific SIRS-based screening algorithms at sites from USA, Canada, UK, Australia and Ireland health institutions were investigated. RESULTS: Severe sepsis screening algorithms' performance was measured on 747 patients presenting with suspected sepsis (401 with severe sepsis, prevalence 53.7%). Sensitivity and specificity of algorithms to flag severe sepsis ranged from 20.2% (95% CI 16.4-24.5%) to 82.3% (95% CI 78.2-85.9%) and 57.8% (95% CI 52.4-63.1%) to 94.8% (95% CI 91.9-96.9%), respectively. Variations in SIRS values between uncomplicated and severe sepsis cohorts were only minor, except a higher mean lactate (>1.6 mmol/L, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We found the Ireland and JFK Medical Center sepsis algorithms performed modestly in stratifying suspected sepsis patients into high-risk groups. Algorithms with lactate levels thresholds of >2 mmol/L rather than >4 mmol/L performed better. ED sepsis registry-based characterisation of patients may help further refine sepsis definitions of the future.