Randomized controlled trial to improve primary care follow-up among emergency department patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Primary care (PC) follow-up for discharged emergency department (ED) patients provides patients with further medical attention. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to determine whether using a freely-available physician appointment-booking website results in higher self-reported PC follow-up. METHODS: We randomized discharged patients whom treating physicians determined PC follow-up was important and who possessed health insurance but had no PC provider to one of three groups: (1) a PC appointment booked through the booking website prior to ED discharge; (2) written information on how to use the booking website; or (3) usual care (i.e. standard follow-up instructions). We phoned subjects two weeks after the ED visit to determine whether they had completed a PC follow-up visit. We also asked subjects about their satisfaction with obtaining a PC appointment, satisfaction with the ED visit, symptom resolution and subsequent ED visits. The self-reported PCP follow-up rate was compared among the study groups by estimating the risk difference (RD) and 95% CI between usual care and each intervention group. RESULTS: 272 subjects were enrolled and randomized and 68% completed the two-week telephone follow-up interview. The self-reported PCP follow-up rate was higher (52%) among subjects whose appointment was booked on the website before ED discharge (RD = 16%; 95% CI -1%, 34%) and lower (25%) for subjects who received booking website information (RD = 13%; 95% CI -32%, 7%) compared to subjects (36%) in the usual care group. A higher percentage of subjects in the booking group were more likely to report being extremely or very satisfied with obtaining a PC appointment (78%) compared to those who received booking website information (54%) or usual care (40%). CONCLUSION: Among ED patients that providers judged PC follow-up is important, using a booking website to schedule an appointment before ED discharge resulted in a higher but not statistically significant self-reported PC follow-up rate. This intervention warrants further investigation in a study with a larger sample size and objective follow-up visit data.

Developing a curriculum for emergency medicine residency orientation programs.

BACKGROUND: New residents enter emergency medicine (EM) residency programs with varying EM experiences, which makes residency orientation programs challenging to design. There is a paucity of literature to support best practices. OBJECTIVE: We report on a curriculum development project for EM residency orientation using the Kern Model. CURRICULUM: Components of the revised curriculum include administrative inculcation into the program; delivering skills and knowledge training to ensure an entering level of competence; setting expectations for learning in the overall residency curriculum; performing an introductory performance evaluation; and socialization into the program. RESULTS: Post-implementation resident surveys found the new curriculum to be helpful in preparing them for the first year of training. CONCLUSIONS: The Kern Model was a relevant and useful method for redesigning a new-resident orientation curriculum.

Pre-endoscopic Rockall and Blatchford scores to identify which emergency department patients with suspected gastrointestinal bleed do not need endoscopic hemostasis.

BACKGROUND: The pre-endoscopic Rockall Score (RS) and the Glasgow-Blatchford Scores (GBS) can help risk stratify patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed who are seen in the Emergency Department (ED). The RS and GBS have yet to be validated in a United States patient population for their ability to discriminate which ED patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed do not need endoscopic hemostasis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether patients who received a score of zero on either score (the lowest risk) in the ED still required upper endoscopic hemostasis during hospitalization. METHODS: Retrospective electronic medical record chart review was performed during a 3-year period (2007-2009) to identify patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal bleed by ED final diagnosis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and related terms at a single urban academic ED. The RS and GBS were calculated from ED chart abstraction and the hospital records of admitted patients were queried for subsequent endoscopic hemostasis. RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety patients with gastrointestinal bleed were identified and 86% were admitted to the hospital. One hundred and twenty-two patients had an RS equal to zero; 67 (55%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 46-63%) of these patients were admitted to the hospital and 11 (16%; 95% CI 9-27%) received endoscopic hemostasis. Sixty-three patients had a GBS equal to zero; 15 (24%; 95% CI 15-36%) were admitted to the hospital and 2 (13%; 95% CI 4-38%) received endoscopic hemostasis. CONCLUSIONS: Some patients who were identified as lowest risk by the GBS or RS still received endoscopic hemostasis during hospital admission. These clinical decision rules may be insufficiently sensitive to predict which patients do not require endoscopic hemostasis.