ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Rapid repetitive administration of short-acting ß-agonists (SABA) is the most effective means of reducing acute airflow obstruction in asthma. Little evidence exists that assesses process measures (ie, timeliness) and outcomes for asthma. We used quality improvement (QI) methods to improve emergency department care in accordance with national guidelines including timely SABA administration and use of asthma severity scores. METHODS: The Model for Improvement was used and interventions were targeted at 4 key drivers: knowledge, engagement, decision support, and workflow enhancement. Time series analysis was performed and outcomes assessed on statistical process control charts. RESULTS: Asthma severity scoring increased from 0% to >95% in triage and to >75% for repeat scores. Time to first SABA (T1) improved by 32.8 minutes (47%). T1 for low severity patients improved by 17.6 minutes (28%). T1 for high severity patients improved by 3.1 minutes to 18.1 minutes (15%). Time to third SABA (T3) improved by 30 minutes (24%). T3 for low severity patients improved by 42.5 minutes (29%) and T3 for high severity patients improved by 21 minutes (23%). Emergency department length of stay for low severity patients discharged to home improved by 29.3 minutes (15%). The number of asthma-related visits between 48-hour return hospitalizations increased from 114 to 261. The admission rate decreased 6.0%. CONCLUSIONS: We implemented standardized asthma severity scoring with high rates of compliance, improved timely administration of ß-agonist treatments, demonstrated early improvements in Emergency department length of stay, and reduced admission rates without increasing unplanned return admissions.
Subject(s)
Asthma/drug therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Quality Improvement , Adolescent , Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists/therapeutic use , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Audit , Guideline Adherence , Hospitals, Pediatric , Humans , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Severity of Illness Index , Triage , WisconsinABSTRACT
Two adolescents presented to our emergency department with isolated, acute onset upper-extremity swelling. In their initial emergency department evaluations, both patients were found to have a deep venous thrombosis. Despite their similar presentations, the etiologies of their deep venous thrombosis were very different. After further evaluation, one patient was diagnosed with Paget-Schroetter syndrome and the other with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. These cases illustrate the importance of maintaining a broad differential diagnosis and using a multidisciplinary approach to patients with the unusual and potentially life-threatening presentation of upper-extremity swelling.
Subject(s)
Edema/etiology , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/diagnosis , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Adolescent , Angioplasty, Balloon , Female , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Thrombectomy , Tissue Plasminogen Activator/therapeutic use , Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis/therapy , Venous Thrombosis/therapyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of physician knowledge of parental expectations on satisfaction with emergency department (ED) care. METHODS: This was a prospective, controlled, interventional trial involving parents of children presenting to a children's hospital ED. Parents completed an expectation survey on arrival, which was either immediately placed back in the enrollment envelope (control) or shown to the physician caring for the child (intervention). The physician was instructed to initial the expectation survey to acknowledge receipt of the survey. Parents then completed a satisfaction survey at discharge. The primary outcomes were differences in satisfaction with physician review of the expectation survey, as measured by 1) parental ratings of overall care and 2) their willingness to recommend the ED to others. A third (baseline) group completed only a satisfaction survey at discharge. RESULTS: A total of 614 (66%) of the 930 enrolled parents completed the study. Intention-to-treat analysis did not show a significant increase in parental satisfaction ratings for either overall care or recommend the ED; however, only 42% of the intervention group surveys had documented physician review. When these initialed surveys were compared with the control group in a per-protocol analysis, there was a significant improvement in parental satisfaction. There were no differences between the control and baseline groups, indicating no effect of the expectation survey completion on satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Physician knowledge of written parental expectations may improve parental satisfaction during an ED visit. Further work is needed to overcome the barriers to physician review of the expectation survey to maximize parent satisfaction.
