Beliefs of physician directors on the management of devastating brain injuries at the Canadian emergency department and intensive care unit interface: a national site-level survey.

PURPOSE: Insufficient evidence-based recommendations to guide care for patients with devastating brain injuries (DBIs) leave patients vulnerable to inconsistent practice at the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) interface. We sought to characterize the beliefs of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) and critical care medicine (CCM) physician site directors regarding current management practices for patients with DBI. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EM and CCM physician directors of adult EDs and ICUs across Canada (December 2022 to March 2023). Our primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who manage (or consult on) patients with DBI in the ED. We conducted subgroup analyses to compare beliefs of EM and CCM physicians. RESULTS: Of 303 eligible respondents, we received 98 (32%) completed surveys (EM physician directors, 46; CCM physician directors, 52). Most physician directors reported participating in the decision to withdraw life-sustaining measures (WLSM) for patients with DBI in the ED (80%, n = 78), but 63% of these (n = 62) said this was infrequent. Physician directors reported that existing neuroprognostication methods are rarely sufficient to support WLSM in the ED (49%, n = 48) and believed that an ICU stay is required to improve confidence (99%, n = 97). Most (96%, n = 94) felt that providing caregiver visitation time prior to WLSM was a valid reason for ICU admission. CONCLUSION: In our survey of Canadian EM and CCM physician directors, 80% participated in WLSM in the ED for patients with DBI. Despite this, most supported ICU admission to optimize neuroprognostication and patient-centred end-of-life care, including organ donation.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'insuffisance des recommandations fondées sur des données probantes pour guider les soins aux individus atteints de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices rend ces personnes vulnérables à des pratiques incohérentes à la jonction entre le service des urgences et de l'unité de soins intensifs (USI). Nous avons cherché à caractériser les croyances des directeurs médicaux canadiens en médecine d'urgence et médecine de soins intensifs concernant les pratiques de prise en charge actuelles des personnes ayant subi une lésion cérébrale dévastatrice. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé un sondage transversal auprès des directeurs médicaux des urgences et des unités de soins intensifs pour adultes du Canada (décembre 2022 à mars 2023). Notre critère d'évaluation principal était la proportion de répondant·es qui prennent en charge (ou jouent un rôle de consultation auprès) des personnes atteintes de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l'urgence. Nous avons effectué des analyses en sous-groupes pour comparer les croyances des médecins des urgences et des soins intensifs. RéSULTATS: Sur les 303 personnes répondantes admissibles, 98 (32 %) ont répondu aux sondages (directions médicales des urgences, 46; directions médicales d'USI, 52). La plupart des directeurs médicaux ont déclaré avoir participé à la décision de retirer des traitements de maintien des fonctions vitales (TFMV) pour des patient·es atteint·es de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices à l'urgence (80 %, n = 78), mais 63 % (n = 62) ont déclaré que c'était peu fréquent. Les directions médicales ont indiqué que les méthodes de neuropronostic existantes sont rarement suffisantes pour appuyer le retrait des TMFV à l'urgence (49 %, n = 48) et croyaient qu'un séjour aux soins intensifs était nécessaire pour améliorer leur confiance en ces méthodes (99 %, n = 97). La plupart (96 %, n = 94) estimaient que le fait d'offrir du temps de visite aux personnes soignantes avant le retrait des TMFV était un motif valable d'admission aux soins intensifs. CONCLUSION: Dans le cadre de notre sondage mené auprès des directions médicales des services d'urgence et des USI au Canada, 80 % d'entre elles ont participé au retrait de TMFV à l'urgence pour des patient·es souffrant de lésions cérébrales dévastatrices. Malgré cela, la plupart d'entre elles étaient en faveur d'une admission aux soins intensifs afin d'optimiser le neuropronostic et les soins de fin de vie axés sur les patient·es, y compris le don d'organes.

Developing a set of emergency department performance measures to evaluate delirium care quality for older adults: a modified e-Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at high risk of developing delirium in the emergency department (ED); however, it is under-recognized in routine clinical care. Lack of detection and treatment is associated with poor outcomes, such as mortality. Performance measures (PMs) are needed to identify variations in quality care to help guide improvement strategies. The purpose of this study is to gain consensus on a set of quality statements and PMs that can be used to evaluate delirium care quality for older ED patients. METHODS: A 3-round modified e-Delphi study was conducted with ED clinical experts. In each round, participants rated quality statements according to the concepts of importance and actionability, then their associated PMs according to the concept of necessity (1-9 Likert scales), with the ability to comment on each. Consensus and stability were evaluated using a priori criteria using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data was examined to identify themes within and across quality statements and PMs, which went through a participant validation exercise in the final round. RESULTS: Twenty-two experts participated, 95.5% were from west or central Canada. From 10 quality statements and 24 PMs, consensus was achieved for six quality statements and 22 PMs. Qualitative data supported justification for including three quality statements and one PM that achieved consensus slightly below a priori criteria. Three overarching themes emerged from the qualitative data related to quality statement actionability. Nine quality statements, nine structure PMs, and 14 process PMs are included in the final set, addressing four areas of delirium care: screening, diagnosis, risk reduction and management. CONCLUSION: Results provide a set of quality statements and PMs that are important, actionable, and necessary to a diverse group of clinical experts. To our knowledge, this is the first known study to develop a de novo set of guideline-based quality statements and PMs to evaluate the quality of delirium care older adults receive in the ED setting.

Protocol for developing a set of performance measures to monitor and evaluate delirium care quality for older adults in the emergency department using a modified e-Delphi process.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults are at high risk of developing delirium in the emergency department (ED). Delirium associated with an ED visit is independently linked to poorer outcomes such as increased length of hospital stay and mortality. Performance measures (PMs) are needed to identify variations in the quality of delirium care to help focus improvement efforts where they are most needed. A preliminary list of 11 quality statements and 24 PMs was developed based on a synthesis of high-quality clinical practice guidelines. The purpose of this study is to gain consensus on a subset of PMs that can be used to evaluate delirium care quality for older ED patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol for a modified e-Delphi study is informed by the Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies. Clinical experts from across Canada and internationally will be recruited through peer referral, professional organisations and social media calls for expressions of interest. A minimum of 17 participants will be recruited. The primary survey for each round will consist of closed-ended questions with the opportunity to provide comments to justify decisions and clarify understanding. Using 9-point Likert scales, participants will rate each quality statement according to the concepts of importance and actionability, then its associated PMs according to the concept of necessity. Results will be fed back to participants in subsequent rounds. A priori stopping criteria have been defined in terms of consensus and stability. A minimum of three rounds will be undertaken to allow participants to have feedback, revise previous responses, then stabilise responses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was provided at the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board (ID HS25728 (H2022:340)). Informed consent will be obtained electronically using the Research Electronic Data Capture secure online platform. Knowledge translation and dissemination will be done through traditional (eg, conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications) and non-traditional (eg, ED Grand Rounds) strategies.

A critical appraisal and recommendation synthesis of delirium clinical practice guidelines relevant to the care of older adults in the emergency department: An umbrella review.

RATIONALE: Older adults are at high risk of developing delirium in the emergency department (ED); however, it is often missed or undertreated. Improving ED delirium care is challenging in part due to a lack of standards to guide best practice. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) translate evidence into recommendations to improve practice. AIM: To critically appraise and synthesize CPG recommendations for delirium care relevant to older ED patients. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review to retrieve relevant CPGs. Quality of the CPGs and their recommendations were critically appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation (AGREE)-II; and Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence (AGREE-REX) instruments. A threshold of 70% or greater in the AGREE-II Rigour of Development domain was used to define high-quality CPGs. Delirium recommendations from CPGs meeting this threshold were included in the synthesis and narrative analysis. RESULTS: AGREE-II Rigour of Development scores ranged from 37% to 83%, with 5 of 10 CPGs meeting the predefined threshold. AGREE-REX overall calculated scores ranged from 44% to 80%. Recommendations were grouped into screening, diagnosis, risk reduction, and management. Although none of the included CPGs were ED-specific, many recommendations incorporated evidence from this setting. There was agreement that screening for nonmodifiable risk factors is important to define high-risk populations, and those at risk should be screened for delirium. The '4A's Test' was the recommended tool to use in the ED specifically. Multicomponent strategies were recommended for delirium risk reduction, and for its management if it occurs. The only area of disagreement was for the short-term use of antipsychotic medication in urgent situations. CONCLUSION: This is the first known review of delirium CPGs including a critical appraisal and synthesis of recommendations. Researchers and policymakers can use this synthesis to inform future improvement efforts and research in the ED. REGISTRATION: This study has been registered in the Open Science Framework registries: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TG7S6OSF.IO/TG7S6.

A critical appraisal of delirium clinical practice guidelines relevant to the care of older adults in the emergency department with a synthesis of recommendations: an umbrella review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Up to 35% of older adults present to the emergency department (ED) with delirium or develop the condition during their ED stay. Delirium associated with an ED visit is independently linked to poorer outcomes such as loss of independence, increased length of hospital stay, and mortality. Improving the quality of delirium care for older ED patients is hindered by a lack of knowledge and standards to guide best practice. High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have the power to translate the complexity of scientific evidence into recommendations to improve and standardize practice. This study will identify and synthesize recommendations from high-quality delirium CPGs relevant to the care of older ED patients. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-phase umbrella review to retrieve relevant CPGs. Quality of the CPGs and their recommendations will be critically appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation (AGREE)-II; and Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation - Recommendations Excellence (AGREE-REX) instruments, respectively. We will also synthesize and conduct a narrative analysis of high-quality CPG recommendations. DISCUSSION: This review will be the first known evidence synthesis of delirium CPGs including a critical appraisal and synthesis of recommendations. Recommendations will be categorized according to target population and setting as a means to define the bredth of knowledge in this area. Future research will use consensus building methods to identify which are most relevant to older ED patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered in the Open Science Framework registries: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TG7S6 .

Impact of employing primary healthcare professionals in emergency department triage on patient flow outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify, critically appraise and summarise evidence on the impact of employing primary healthcare professionals (PHCPs: family physicians/general practitioners (GPs), nurse practitioners (NP) and nurses with increased authority) in the emergency department (ED) triage, on patient flow outcomes. METHODS: We searched Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library (Wiley) and CINAHL (EBSCO) (inception to January 2020). Our primary outcome was the time to provider initial assessment (PIA). Secondary outcomes included time to triage, proportion of patients leaving without being seen (LWBS), length of stay (ED LOS), proportion of patients leaving against medical advice (LAMA), number of repeat ED visits and patient satisfaction. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data and assessed study quality using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence quality assessment tool. RESULTS: From 23 973 records, 40 comparative studies including 10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 13 pre-post studies were included. PHCP interventions were led by NP (n=14), GP (n=3) or nurses with increased authority (n=23) at triage. In all studies, PHCP-led intervention effectiveness was compared with the traditional nurse-led triage model. Median duration of the interventions was 6 months. Study quality was generally low (confounding bias); 7 RCTs were classified as moderate quality. Most studies reported that PHCP-led triage interventions decreased the PIA (13/14), ED LOS (29/30), proportion of patients LWBS (8/10), time to triage (3/3) and repeat ED visits (5/6), and increased the patient satisfaction (8/10). The proportion of patients LAMA did not differ between groups (3/3). Evidence from RCTs (n=8) as well as other study designs showed a significant decrease in ED LOS favouring the PHCP-led interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, PHCP-led triage interventions improved ED patient flow metrics. There was a significant decrease in ED LOS irrespective of the study design, favouring the PHCP-led interventions. Evidence from well-designed high-quality RCTs is required prior to widespread implementation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020148053.

Interventions and strategies involving primary healthcare professionals to manage emergency department overcrowding: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a scoping review to identify and summarise the existing literature on interventions involving primary healthcare professionals to manage emergency department (ED) overcrowding. DESIGN: A scoping review. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive database search of Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library (Wiley) and CINAHL (EBSCO) databases was conducted (inception until January 2020) using peer-reviewed search strategies, complemented by a search of grey literature sources. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Interventions and strategies involving primary healthcare professionals (PHCPs: general practitioners (GPs), nurse practitioners (NPs) or nurses with expanded role) to manage ED overcrowding. METHODS: We engaged and collaborated, with 13 patient partners during the design and conduct stages of this review. We conducted this review using the JBI guidelines. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. We conducted descriptive analysis of the included studies (frequencies and percentages). RESULTS: From 23 947 records identified, we included 268 studies published between 1981 and 2020. The majority (58%) of studies were conducted in North America and were predominantly cohort studies (42%). The reported interventions were either 'within ED' (48%) interventions (eg, PHCP-led ED triage or fast track) or 'outside ED' interventions (52%) (eg, after-hours GP clinic and GP cooperatives). PHCPs involved in the interventions were: GP (32%), NP (26%), nurses with expanded role (16%) and combinations of the PHCPs (42%). The 'within ED' and 'outside ED' interventions reported outcomes on patient flow and ED utilisation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We identified many interventions involving PHCPs that predominantly reported a positive impact on ED utilisation/patient flow metrics. Future research needs to focus on conducting well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews to evaluate the effectiveness of specific interventions involving PHCPs to critically appraise and summarise evidence on this topic.

CAEP Position Statement - Management of devastating brain injuries in the emergency department: Enhancing neuroprognostication and maintaining the opportunity for organ and tissue donation.

The primary purpose of this statement is to improve neuroprognostication after devastating brain injury (DBI), with a secondary benefit of potential organ and tissue donation.

Health human resources for emergency medicine: a framework for the future.

In June of 2016, the Collaborative Working Group (CWG) on the Future of Emergency Medicine presented its final report at the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) annual meeting in Quebec City. The CWG report made a number of recommendations concerning physician Human Health Resource (HHR) shortfalls in emergency medicine, specific changes for both the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (FRCPC) and the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CCFP-EM) training programs, HHR needs in rural and remote hospitals, future collaboration of the CCFP-EM and FRCPC programs, and directions for future research. All recommendations were endorsed by CAEP, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC), and the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC). The CWG report was published in CJEM and has served as a basis for ongoing discussion in the emergency medicine community in Canada. The CWG identified an estimated shortfall of 478 emergency physicians in Canada in 2016, rising to 1071 by 2020 and 1518 by 2025 assuming no expansion of EM residency training capacity. In 2017, the CAEP board struck a new committee, The Future of Emergency Medicine in Canada (FEMC), to advocate with appropriate stakeholders to implement the CWG recommendations and to continue with this important work. FEMC led a workshop at CAEP 2018 in Calgary to develop a regional approach to HHR advocacy, recognizing different realities in each province and region. There was wide representation at this workshop and a rich and passionate discussion among those present. This paper represents the output of the workshop and will guide subsequent deliberations by FEMC. FEMC has set the following three goals as we work toward the overarching purpose to improve timely access to high quality emergency care: (1) to define and describe categories of emergency departments (EDs) in Canada, (2) define the full time equivalents required by category of ED in Canada, and (3) recommend the ideal combination of training and certification for emergency physicians in Canada. A fourth goal supports the other three goals: (4) urge further consideration and implementation of the CWG-EM recommendations related to coordination and optimization of the current two training programs. We believe that goals 1 and 2 can largely be accomplished by the CAEP annual meeting in 2020, and goal 3 by the CAEP annual meeting in 2021. Goal 4 is ongoing with both the RCPSC and the CFPC. We urge the EM community across Canada to engage with our committee to support improved access and EM care for all Canadians.

Emergency overcrowding and access block: A smaller problem than we think.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) access block, the inability to provide timely care for high acuity patients, is the leading safety concern in First World EDs. The main cause of ED access block is hospital access block with prolonged boarding of inpatients in emergency stretchers. Cumulative emergency access gap, the product of the number of arriving high acuity patients and their average delay to reach a care space, is a novel access measure that provides a facility-level estimate of total emergency care delays. Many health leaders believe these delays are too large to be solved without substantial increases in hospital capacity. Our objective was to quantify cumulative emergency access blocks (the problem) as a fraction of inpatient capacity (the potential solution) at a large sample of Canadian hospitals. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we collated 2015 administrative data from 25 Canadian hospitals summarizing patient inflow and delays to ED care space. Cumulative access gap for high acuity patients was calculated by multiplying the number of Canadian Triage Acuity Scale (CTAS) 1-3 patients by their average delay to reach a care space. We compared cumulative ED access gap to available inpatient bed hours to estimate fractional access gap. RESULTS: Study sites included 16 tertiary and 9 community EDs in 12 cities, representing 1.79 million patient visits. Median ED census (interquartile range) was 66,300 visits per year (58,700-80,600). High acuity patients accounted for 70.7% of visits (60.9%-79.0%). The mean (SD) cumulative ED access gap was 46,000 stretcher hours per site per year (± 19,900), which was 1.14% (± 0.45%) of inpatient capacity. CONCLUSION: ED access gaps are large and jeopardize care for high acuity patients, but they are small relative to hospital operating capacity. If access block were viewed as a "whole hospital" problem, capacity or efficiency improvements in the range of 1% to 3% could profoundly mitigate emergency care delays.

Comparing the Effect of Throughput and Output Factors on Emergency Department Crowding: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study compares how throughput and output factors affect emergency department (ED) median waiting room time. METHODS: Administrative health care use records were used to identify all daytime (8 am to 8 pm) visits made to adult EDs in Winnipeg, Canada, between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2013. First, we measured the waiting room time (from patient registration until transfer into the ED) of each index visit (incoming patient). We then linked each index visit to a group of existing patients surrounding it and counted the number of existing patients engaged in throughput processes (radiographs, computed tomography [CT] scans, advanced diagnostic tests) and one output process (waiting to be hospitalized). Regression analysis was used to measure how strongly each factor uniquely affected incoming patient median waiting room time, stratified by the acuity level. RESULTS: Analyses were performed on 143,172 index visits. On average, 153.4 radiographs and 48.5 CT scans were conducted daily, whereas 45.3 patients were admitted daily to hospital. Median waiting room time was shortest (8.0 minutes) for the highest-acuity index visits and was not influenced by these throughput or output factors. For all other index visits, median waiting room time was associated strongly with the number of existing patients receiving radiographs, and, to a lesser extent, with the number of existing patients receiving CT scans and waiting for hospital admission. CONCLUSION: Both throughput and output factors affect how long newly arriving ED patients remain in the waiting room. This suggests that a range of strategies may help to reduce ED wait time, each requiring stronger ED and hospital partnerships.

An ED paradox: patients who arrive by ambulance and then leave without consulting an ED provider.

BACKGROUND: Scientists have called for strategies to identify ED patients with unmet needs. We identify the unique profile of ED patients who arrive by ambulance and subsequently leave without consulting a provider (ie, a paradoxical visit, PV). METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort design, administrative data from Winnipeg, Manitoba were interrogated to identify all ED patients 17+ years old as having zero, single or multiple PVs in 2012/2013. Analyses compare the sociodemographic, physical (eg, arthritis), mental (eg, substance abuse) and concurrent healthcare use profile of non-PV, single and multiple PV patients. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 122 639 patients with 250 754 ED visits. Across all ED sites, 2.3% of patients (N=2815) made 3387 PVs, comprising 1.4% of all ED visits. Descriptively, more single versus non-PV patients lived in urban core and lowest-income areas, were frequent ED users generally, were substance abusers and had seven plus primary care physician visits. Multiple PV patients had a similar but more extreme profile versus their single PV counterparts (eg, 54.7% of multiple vs 27.4% of single PV patients had substance abuse challenges). From multivariate statistics, single versus non-PV patients are defined uniquely by their frequent ED use, by their substance abuse, as living in a core and low income area, and as having multiple visits with primary care physicians. CONCLUSIONS: PV patients have needs that do not align with the acute model of ED care. These patients may benefit from a more integrated care approach likely involving allied health professionals.

CAEP 2015 Academic Symposium: Recommendations for University Governance and Administration for Emergency Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: 1) To identify the strengths and challenges of governance structures in academic emergency medicine (EM), and 2) to make recommendations on principles and approaches that may guide improvements. METHODS: Over the course of 9 months, eight established EM leaders met by teleconference, reviewed the literature, and discussed their findings and experiences to arrive at recommendations on governance in academic units of EM. The results and recommendations were presented at the annual Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium, where attendees provided feedback. The updated recommendations were subsequently distributed to the CAEP Academic Section for further input, and the final recommendations were decided by consensus. RESULTS: The panel identified four governance areas of interest: 1) the elements of governance; 2) the relationships between emergency physicians and academic units of EM, and between the academic units of EM and faculty of medicine; 3) current status of governance in Canadian academic units of EM; and 4) essential elements of good governance. Six recommendations were developed around three themes, including 1) the importance of good governance; 2) the purposes of an academic unit of EM; and 3) essential elements for better governance for academic units of EM. Recommendations included identifying the importance of good governance, recognizing the need to adapt to the different models depending on the local environment; seeking full departmental status, provided it is mutually beneficial to EM and the faculty of medicine (and health authority); using a consultation service to learn from the experience of other academic units of EM; and establishing an annual forum for EM leaders. CONCLUSION: Although governance of academic EM is complex, there are ways to iteratively improve the mission of academic units of EM: providing exceptional patient care through research and education. Although there is no one-size-fits-all guide, there are practical recommended steps for academic units of EM to consider.