H. Farley

Improving Handoffs in the Emergency Department

Patient handoffs at shift change are a ubiquitous and potentially hazardous process in emergency care. As crowding and lengthy evaluations become the standard for an increasing proportion of emergency departments (EDs), the number of patients handed off will likely increase. It is critical now more than ever before to ensure that handoffs supply valid and useful shared understandings between providers at transitions of care. The purpose of this article is to provide the most up-to-date evidence and collective thinking about the process and safety of handoffs between physicians in the ED. It offers perspectives from other disciplines, provides a conceptual framework for handoffs, and categorizes models of existing practices. Legal and risk management issues are also addressed. A proposal for the development of handoff quality measures is outlined. Practical strategies are suggested to improve ED handoffs. Finally, a research agenda is proposed to provide a roadmap to future work that may increase knowledge in this area.

Emergency Department Patient Flow: The Influence of Hospital Census Variables on Emergency Department Length of Stay

OBJECTIVES The objective was to evaluate the association between hospital census variables and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS). This may give insights into future strategies to relieve ED crowding. METHODS This multicenter cohort study captured ED LOS and disposition for all ED patients in five hospitals during five 1-week study periods. A stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to examine associations between ED LOS and various hospital census parameters. RESULTS Data were analyzed on 27,325 patients on 161 study days. A significant positive relationship was demonstrated between median ED LOS and intensive care unit (ICU) census, cardiac telemetry census, and the percentage of ED patients admitted each day. There was no relationship in this cohort between ED LOS and ED volume, total hospital occupancy rate, or the number of scheduled cardiac or surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS In multiple hospital settings, ED LOS is correlated with the number of admissions and census of the higher acuity nursing units, more so than the number of ED patients each day, particularly in larger hospitals with busier EDs. Streamlining ED admissions and improving availability of inpatient critical care beds may reduce ED LOS.

Emergency Department Tachypnea Predicts Transfer to a Higher Level of Care in the First 24 hours After ED Admission

OBJECTIVES The authors hypothesized that vital sign abnormalities detected in the emergency department (ED) can be used to forecast clinical deterioration occurring within 24 hours of hospital admission. METHODS This was a retrospective case-control study performed after implementation of a hospitalwide rapid response team (RRT) system. Inclusion criteria for study patients consisted of age > or = 18 years, admission to the general floor though the ED, and RRT activation and subsequent transfer to a higher level of care in the first 24 hours. Control patients were > or =18 years, were admitted to the floor though the ED, never required RRT or transfer to a higher level of care, and were matched to cases by risk of mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to model the odds of an adverse outcome as a function of race and sex, respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and systolic (sBP) and diastolic blood pressure (dBP) at time of transfer from the ED. RESULTS A total of 74 cases and 246 controls were used. RR (odds ratio [OR] = 2.79 per 10-point change, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.41 to 5.51) and to a lesser extent dBP (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.97) contributed significantly to the odds of intensive care unit (ICU) or intermediate care transfer within 24 hours of admission; HR (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.37) did not. CONCLUSIONS Emergency department RR preceding floor transfer appears to have a significant relationship to the need for ICU or intermediate care transfer in the first 24 hours of hospital admission.

Measuring the opportunity loss of time spent boarding admitted patients in the emergency department: a multihospital analysis.

&NA; Emergency department (ED) crowding is an international crisis affecting the timeliness and quality of patient care. Boarding of admitted patients in the ED is recognized as a major contributor to ED crowding. The opportunity loss of this time is the benefit or value it could produce if it were used for something else. In crowded EDs, the typical alternative use of this time is to treat patients waiting to be seen. Various ED performance benchmarks related to inpatient boarding have been proposed, but they are not commonly reported and have yet to be evaluated to determine whether they correlate with the opportunity loss of time used for boarding. This study quantified several measures of ED boarding in a variety of hospital settings and looked for correlations between them and the opportunity loss of the time spent on boarding. In particular, average boarding time per admission was found to be easy to measure. Results revealed that it had a near‐perfect linear correlation with opportunity loss. The opportunity loss of every 30 minutes of average boarding time equaled the time required to see 3.5 percent of the EDs daily census. For busy hospitals, the opportunity loss allowed sufficient time for staff to be able to see up to 36 additional patients per day. This correlation suggests that average boarding time per admission may be useful in evaluating efforts to reduce ED crowding and improve patient care.

A Survey of the Use of Time-Out Protocols in Emergency Medicine

BACKGROUND Time-outs, as one of the elements of the Joint Commission Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, and Wrong Person Surgery has been in effect since July 1, 2004. Time-outs are required by The Joint Commission for all hospital procedures regardless of location, including emergency departments (EDs). Attitudes about ED time-outs were assessed for a sample of senior emergency physicians serving in leadership roles for a national professional society. METHODS A survey questionnaire was administered to members of the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Council at the October 2009 ACEP Council meeting on the use of time-outs in the ED. A total of 225 (72%) of the 331 councilors present filled out the survey. RESULTS Twenty-nine (13%) of respondents were unaware of a formal time-out policy in their ED, 79 (35%) reported that ED time-outs were warranted, and 5 (2%) reported they knew of an instance where a time-out may have prevented an error. Chest tubes (167 respondents [74%]) and the use of sedation (142 respondents [63%]) were most commonly identified as ED procedures that necessitated a time-out. Episodes of any wrong-site error in their EDs were reported by 16 (7%) of the respondents. Wrong patient (9 respondents [4%]) and wrong procedure (2 respondents [1%]) errors were less common. CONCLUSIONS Although the time-out requirement has been in effect since 2004, more than 1 in 10 of ED physicians in this sample ofED physician leaders were unaware of it. According to the respondents, medical errors preventable by time-outs were rare; however, time-outs may be useful for certain procedures, particularly when there is a risk of wrong-site, wrong-patient, or wrong-procedure medical errors.