Emergency Physicians Who Produce Higher Relative Value Units Per Hour Spend Similar Amounts of Time at Patient Bedsides as Their Colleagues.

BACKGROUND: Emergency physicians (EPs) are expected to deliver quality care while maintaining high levels of efficiency and productivity as measured by the relative value unit (RVU). OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether academic EPs with higher RVUs spend less time at the bedside than their colleagues. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational, cohort study. A 13-item task list was generated, pilot-tested, and placed onto a computerized tablet. RESULTS: There was no difference among EPs in terms of time spent at bedside, 26.7% of total time, 17.31 min (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.43-20.19), p = 0.052; resident interaction 13.1%, 8.46 min (95% CI 4.68-12.25), p = 0.959; charting, 11.1%, 7.17 min (95% CI .746-5.65), p = 0.055; information search, 10.5%, 6.80 min (95% CI 0.84-8.52), p = 0.320; walking, 9.0%, 5.86 min (95% CI 5.17-6.54), p = 0.112; consultant interaction, 8.2%, 5.28 min (95% CI 3.18-7.40), p = 0.404; writing orders, 6.5%, 4.19 min (95% CI 3.22-5.15), p = 0.109; nursing interaction, 5.6%, 3.65 min (95% CI 2.54-4.76), p = 0.260; other, 5.2%, 3.65 min (95% CI 1.76-5.02), p = 0.785; medical student interaction, 4.2%, 2.75 min (95% CI 0.53-4.97), p = 0.102; physician assistant interaction, 2.8%, 1.79 min (95% CI 1.08-2.50), p = 0.959; clerical interaction, 1.7%, 1.13 min (95% CI .69-1.57), p = 0.335; and electrocardiogram interpretation, 0.7%, 0.45 min (95% CI .32-.58), p = 0.793. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in RVU-based productivity data, academic EPs spend similar amounts of time involved in the daily tasks of taking care of patients, underscoring that direct physician-patient interaction is one practice parameter that is not compromised among these EPs.

Ultrasound-guidance can reduce adverse events during femoral central venous cannulation.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guidance for internal jugular central venous cannulation (CVC) has become the recommended best practice and has been shown to improve placement success and reduce complications. There is a dearth of studies that evaluate emergency point-of-care ultrasound guidance of femoral CVC. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine if point-of-care ultrasound guidance for femoral CVC decreases adverse events and increases the likelihood of successful placement when compared with the landmark technique. METHODS: We conducted an Institutional Review Board-approved, prospective, observational study of consecutive patients who required CVC. Physicians who performed CVC completed a standardized, web-based data sheet for a national CVC registry. We evaluated single-institution data regarding CVC site, ultrasound usage, CVC indication, and mechanical complications (e.g., pneumothorax, arterial puncture, failed access, catheter misdirection, and hematoma). The study period was between January 2006 and June 2010. Analysis using Pearson's χ(2) and Agresti-Coull binomial confidence intervals was performed; significance was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: We evaluated data for 143 patients who had femoral CVC in our institution. Sixty CVCs (42%) were performed under ultrasound guidance, 83 (58%) via landmark technique (p = 0.0159); 3.3% of femoral central venous lines placed by ultrasound guidance had recorded adverse events compared with 9.6% for the landmark technique (p = 0.145). There was no statistically significant difference in complications between ultrasound-guidance and landmark techniques. Our data showed a trend toward decreased rates of arterial puncture and reduced cannulation attempts resulting in improved placement success. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience shows that ultrasound guidance for femoral CVC might decrease complications and improve placement success, although we cannot recommend this approach without additional data. We recommend a larger study to further evaluate this technique.