ABSTRACT
Background: An increasing proportion of the population in the United States have limited English proficiency (LEP). Hospitals that receive federal funding must offer interpreter services. However, access is often lacking for patients. Patients with LEP are at higher risk for adverse events, and the Emergency Department is a particularly high-risk environment for these events. Methods: This quality improvement initiative took place from April 2021 to August 2022 in an urban, tertiary care Pediatric Emergency Department. A driver diagram informed four Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, and data were collected through medical record review, patient surveys, and staff surveys. We tracked outcomes using run and control chart data. Results: During the study period, the proportion of patients with LEP reporting "always" having an interpreter was unchanged (no centerline shift-control chart rules). Documentation of interpreter use for encounters with patients with LEP improved. Preferred language documentation and documentation of the need for an interpreter in the electronic medical record showed no change. Process measure data for staff-reported use of professional interpreters significantly increased, and the use of ad hoc interpreters decreased significantly. Length of stay did not change for English or LEP patients. Conclusions: This quality improvement initiative improved appropriate documentation of LEP and decreased use of nonqualified interpreters, although no change occurred in the proportion of patients who reported always having an interpreter. Patient satisfaction was unaffected.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The majority of children in the United States seek emergency care at community-based general emergency departments (GEDs); however, the quality of GED pediatric emergency care varies widely. This may be explained by a number of factors, including residency training environments and postgraduate knowledge decay. Emergency medicine (EM) residents train in academic pediatric EDs, but didactic and clinical experience vary widely between programs, and little is known about the pediatric skills of these EM residents. This study aimed to assess the performance of senior EM residents in treating simulated pediatric patients at the end of their training. METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional, simulation-based cohort study assessing the simulated performance of senior EM resident physicians from two Massachusetts programs leading medical teams caring for three critically ill patients. Sessions were video recorded and scored separately by three reviewers using a previously published simulation assessment tool. Self-efficacy surveys were completed prior to each session. The primary outcome was a median total performance score (TPS), calculated by the mean of individualized domain scores (IDS) for each case. Each IDS was calculated as a percentage of items performed on a checklist-based instrument. RESULTS: A total of 18 EM resident physicians participated (PGY-3 = 8, PGY-4 = 10). Median TPS for the cohort was 61% (IQR = 56%-70%). Median IDSs by case were as follows: sepsis 67% (IQR = 50%-67%), seizure 67% (IQR = 50%-83%), and cardiac arrest 67% (IQR = 43%-70%). The overall cohort self-efficacy for pediatric EM (PEM) was 64% (IQR = 60%-70%). CONCLUSIONS: This study has begun the process of benchmarking clinical performance of graduating EM resident physicians. Overall, the EM resident cohort in this study performed similar to prior GED teams. Self-efficacy related to PEM correlated well with performance, with the exception of knowledge relative to intravenous fluid and vasopressor administration in pediatric septic shock. A significant area of discrepancy and missed checklist items were those related to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and basic life support maneuvers.
