Key factors for sustainable working conditions in emergency departments: an EUSEM-initiated, Europe-wide consensus survey.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Modern emergency medicine (EM) is a complex, demanding, and occasionally stressful field of work. Working conditions, provider well-being, and associated health and performance outcomes are key factors influencing the establishment of a sustainable emergency department (ED) working environment. OBJECTIVES: This multinational European Delphi survey aimed to identify unequivocal major factors for good and poor ED working conditions and their possible effects on health care provider well-being. DESIGN/SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 18 experts from six European countries (Belgium, Finland, Germany, Italy, Romania, and the UK) covering three different hospital sizes (small, medium, and large) in their respective countries participated in the two-round Delphi survey. All panelists held leadership roles in EM. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The first step involved conducting an extensive literature search on ED working conditions. The second step involved the first Delphi round, which consisted of structured interviews with the panelists. The survey was designed to obtain information concerning important working conditions, comments regarding work-life factors identified from the literature, and ratings of their importance. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed following a standardized protocol. In the second Delphi round, experts rated the relevance of items consolidated from the first Delphi round (classified into ED work system factors, provider health outcomes, and ED work-life intervention approaches). RESULTS: A nearly unequivocal consensus was obtained in four ED work condition categories, including positive (e.g. job challenges, personal motivation, and case complexities) and negative (e.g. overcrowding, workflow interruptions/multitasking, medical errors) ED work conditions. The highly relevant adverse personal health events identified included physical fatigue, exhaustion, and burnout. Concerning intervention practices, the panelists offered a wide spectrum of opportunities with less consensus. CONCLUSION: Work system conditions exert positive and negative effects on the work life of ED providers across Europe. Although most European countries have varying health care systems, the expert-based survey results presented herein strongly suggest that improvement strategies should focus on system-related external stressors common in various countries. Our findings lay the scientific groundwork for future intervention studies at the local and systemic levels to improve ED provider work life.

Towards standardization of 18F-FET PET imaging: do we need a consistent method of background activity assessment?

BACKGROUND: PET with O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (18F-FET) has reached increasing clinical significance for patients with brain neoplasms. For quantification of standard PET-derived parameters such as the tumor-to-background ratio, the background activity is assessed using a region of interest (ROI) or volume of interest (VOI) in unaffected brain tissue. However, there is no standardized approach regarding the assessment of the background reference. Therefore, we evaluated the intra- and inter-reader variability of commonly applied approaches for clinical 18F-FET PET reading. The background activity of 20 18F-FET PET scans was independently evaluated by 6 readers using a (i) simple 2D-ROI, (ii) spherical VOI with 3.0 cm diameter, and (iii) VOI consisting of crescent-shaped ROIs; each in the contralateral, non-affected hemisphere including white and gray matter in line with the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and German guidelines. To assess intra-reader variability, each scan was evaluated 10 times by each reader. The coefficient of variation (CoV) was assessed for determination of intra- and inter-reader variability. In a second step, the best method was refined by instructions for a guided background activity assessment and validated by 10 further scans. RESULTS: Compared to the other approaches, the crescent-shaped VOIs revealed most stable results with the lowest intra-reader variabilities (median CoV 1.52%, spherical VOI 4.20%, 2D-ROI 3.69%; p < 0.001) and inter-reader variabilities (median CoV 2.14%, spherical VOI 4.02%, 2D-ROI 3.83%; p = 0.001). Using the guided background assessment, both intra-reader variabilities (median CoV 1.10%) and inter-reader variabilities (median CoV 1.19%) could be reduced even more. CONCLUSIONS: The commonly applied methods for background activity assessment show different variability which might hamper 18F-FET PET quantification and comparability in multicenter settings. The proposed background activity assessment using a (guided) crescent-shaped VOI allows minimization of both intra- and inter-reader variability and might facilitate comprehensive methodological standardization of amino acid PET which is of interest in the light of the anticipated EANM technical guidelines.