Steven Marc Friedman

Emergency department discharge instructions comprehension and compliance study.

OBJECTIVES To assess patient comprehension of emergency department discharge instructions and to describe other predictors of patient compliance with discharge instructions. METHODS Patients departing from the emergency department of an inner-city teaching hospital were invited to undergo a structured interview and reading test, and to participate in a follow-up telephone interview 2 weeks later. Two physicians, blinded to the others data, scored patient comprehension of discharge information and compliance with discharge instructions. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using a kappa-weighted statistic, and correlations were assessed using Spearmans rank correlation coefficient and Fishers exact test. RESULTS Of 106 patients approached, 88 (83%) were enrolled. The inter-rater reliability of physician rating scores was high (kappa = 0.66). Approximately 60% of subjects demonstrated reading ability at or below a Grade 7 level. Comprehension was positively associated with reading ability (r = 0.29, p = 0.01) and English as first language (r = 0.27, p = 0.01). Reading ability was positively associated with years of education (r = 0.43, p < 0.0001) and first language (r = 0.24, p = 0.03), and inversely associated with age (r = -0.21, p = 0.05). Non-English first language and need for translator were associated with poorer comprehension of discharge instructions but not related to compliance. Compliance with discharge instructions was correlated with comprehension (r = 0.31, p = 0.01) but not associated with age, language, education, years in anglophone country, reading ability, format of discharge instructions, follow-up modality or association with a family physician. CONCLUSIONS Emergency department patients demonstrated poor reading skills. Comprehension was the only factor significantly related to compliance; therefore, future interventions to improve compliance with emergency department instructions will be most effective if they focus on improving comprehension.

Errors, near misses and adverse events in the emergency department: What can patients tell us?

OBJECTIVE We sought to determine whether patients or their families could identify adverse events in the emergency department (ED), to characterize patient reports of errors and to compare patient reports to events recorded by health care providers. METHODS This was a prospective cohort study in a quaternary care inner city teaching hospital with approximately 40,000 annual visits. ED patients were recruited for participation in a standardized interview within 24 hours of ED discharge and a follow-up interview 3-7 days after discharge. Responses regarding events were tabulated and compared with physician and nurse notations in the medical record and hospital event reporting system. RESULTS Of 292 eligible patients, 201 (69%) were interviewed within 24 hours of ED discharge, and 143 (71% of interviewees) underwent a follow-up interview 3-7 days after discharge. Interviewees did not differ from the base ED population in terms of age, sex or language. Analysis of patient interviews identified 10 adverse events (5% incident rate; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.41%-8.96%), 8 near misses (4% incident rate; 95% CI 1.73%-7.69%) and no medical errors. Of the 10 adverse events, 6 (60%) were characterized as preventable (2 raters; kappa=0.78, standard error [SE] 0.20; 95% CI 0.39-1.00; p=0.01). Adverse events were primarily related to delayed or inadequate analgesia. Only 4 out of 8 (50%) near misses were intercepted by hospital personnel. The secondary interview elicited 2 out of 10 adverse events and 3 out of 8 near misses that had not been identified in the primary interview. No designation (0 out of 10) of an adverse event was recorded in the ED medical record or in the confidential hospital event reporting system. CONCLUSION ED patients can identify adverse events affecting their care. Moreover, many of these events are not recorded in the medical record. Engaging patients and their family members in identification of errors may enhance patient safety.

Comparing the effects of infrastructure on bicycling injury at intersections and non-intersections using a case–crossover design

Background This study examined the impact of transportation infrastructure at intersection and non-intersection locations on bicycling injury risk. Methods In Vancouver and Toronto, we studied adult cyclists who were injured and treated at a hospital emergency department. A case–crossover design compared the infrastructure of injury and control sites within each injured bicyclists route. Intersection injury sites (N=210) were compared to randomly selected intersection control sites (N=272). Non-intersection injury sites (N=478) were compared to randomly selected non-intersection control sites (N=801). Results At intersections, the types of routes meeting and the intersection design influenced safety. Intersections of two local streets (no demarcated traffic lanes) had approximately one-fifth the risk (adjusted OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.66) of intersections of two major streets (more than two traffic lanes). Motor vehicle speeds less than 30 km/h also reduced risk (adjusted OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.92). Traffic circles (small roundabouts) on local streets increased the risk of these otherwise safe intersections (adjusted OR 7.98, 95% CI 1.79 to 35.6). At non-intersection locations, very low risks were found for cycle tracks (bike lanes physically separated from motor vehicle traffic; adjusted OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.59) and local streets with diverters that reduce motor vehicle traffic (adjusted OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.003 to 0.60). Downhill grades increased risks at both intersections and non-intersections. Conclusions These results provide guidance for transportation planners and engineers: at local street intersections, traditional stops are safer than traffic circles, and at non-intersections, cycle tracks alongside major streets and traffic diversion from local streets are safer than no bicycle infrastructure.

Patients who leave the emergency department without being seen by a physician: a control-matched study

OBJECTIVE To describe the socio-demographic characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients who leave the emergency department (ED) without being seen by a physician. METHODS This 3-month prospective study was conducted at a downtown Toronto teaching hospital. Patients who left the ED without being seen (LWBS) were matched with controls based on registration time and triage level. Subjects and controls were interviewed by telephone within 1 week after leaving the ED. RESULTS During the study period, 386 (3.57%) of 10,808 ED patients left without being seen. One-third of these had no fixed address or no telephone, and only 92 (23.8%) consented to a telephone interview. They cited excessive wait time as the most common reason for leaving the ED (in 36.7% of cases). Despite leaving the ED without being seen, they were no more likely than those in the control group to seek follow-up medical attention (70 % in both groups). Among those from both groups who did seek follow-up, the LWBS patients were more likely to do so the same day or the day after leaving the ED. The LWBS patients often lacked a regular physician (39.1% v. 21.7%; p = 0.01) and were more likely to attend an ED or urgent care clinic (34.8% v. 12.0%; p < 0.001). Controls were more likely to follow up with a family physician (37.0% v. 23.9%; p = 0.06). The LWBS and control groups did not differ in subjective health status at 48 hours after leaving the ED, nor in subsequent re-investigation in hospital. CONCLUSIONS Patients who leave the ED without being seen have different socio-demographic features, methods of accessing the health care system, affiliations and expectations than the general ED population. They are often socially disenfranchised, with limited access to traditional primary care. These patients are generally low acuity, but they are at risk of important and avoidable adverse outcomes.

Severity of urban cycling injuries and the relationship with personal, trip, route and crash characteristics: analyses using four severity metrics

Objective To examine the relationship between cycling injury severity and personal, trip, route and crash characteristics. Methods Data from a previous study of injury risk, conducted in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada, were used to classify injury severity using four metrics: (1) did not continue trip by bike; (2) transported to hospital by ambulance; (3) admitted to hospital; and (4) Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). Multiple logistic regression was used to examine associations with personal, trip, route and crash characteristics. Results Of 683 adults injured while cycling, 528 did not continue their trip by bike, 251 were transported by ambulance and 60 were admitted to hospital for further treatment. Treatment urgencies included 75 as CTAS=1 or 2 (most medically urgent), 284 as CTAS=3, and 320 as CTAS=4 or 5 (least medically urgent). Older age and collision with a motor vehicle were consistently associated with increased severity in all four metrics and statistically significant in three each (both variables with ambulance transport and CTAS; age with hospital admission; and motor vehicle collision with did not continue by bike). Other factors were consistently associated with more severe injuries, but statistically significant in one metric each: downhill grades; higher motor vehicle speeds; sidewalks (these significant for ambulance transport); multiuse paths and local streets (both significant for hospital admission). Conclusions In two of Canadas largest cities, about one-third of the bicycle crashes were collisions with motor vehicles and the resulting injuries were more severe than in other crash circumstances, underscoring the importance of separating cyclists from motor vehicle traffic. Our results also suggest that bicycling injury severity and injury risk would be reduced on facilities that minimise slopes, have lower vehicle speeds, and that are designed for bicycling rather than shared with pedestrians.

Bicycling crash circumstances vary by route type: a cross-sectional analysis

BackgroundWidely varying crash circumstances have been reported for bicycling injuries, likely because of differing bicycling populations and environments. We used data from the Bicyclists’ Injuries and the Cycling Environment Study in Vancouver and Toronto, Canada, to describe the crash circumstances of people injured while cycling for utilitarian and leisure purposes. We examined the association of crash circumstances with route type.MethodsAdult cyclists injured and treated in a hospital emergency department described their crash circumstances. These were classified into major categories (collision vs. fall, motor vehicle involved vs. not) and subcategories. The distribution of circumstances was tallied for each of 14 route types defined in an earlier analysis. Ratios of observed vs. expected were tallied for each circumstance and route type combination.ResultsOf 690 crashes, 683 could be characterized for this analysis. Most (74%) were collisions. Collisions included those with motor vehicles (34%), streetcar (tram) or train tracks (14%), other surface features (10%), infrastructure (10%), and pedestrians, cyclists, or animals (6%). The remainder of the crashes were falls (26%), many as a result of collision avoidance manoeuvres. Motor vehicles were involved directly or indirectly with 48% of crashes. Crash circumstances were distributed differently by route type, for example, collisions with motor vehicles, including “doorings”, were overrepresented on major streets with parked cars. Collisions involving streetcar tracks were overrepresented on major streets. Collisions involving infrastructure (curbs, posts, bollards, street furniture) were overrepresented on multiuse paths and bike paths.ConclusionsThese data supplement our previous analyses of relative risks by route type by indicating the types of crashes that occur on each route type. This information can guide municipal engineers and planners towards improvements that would make cycling safer.

Clinical impact of diagnostic imaging discrepancy by radiology trainees in an urban teaching hospital emergency department

BackgroundTo characterize clinically significant diagnostic imaging (DI) discrepancies by radiology trainees and the impact on emergency department (ED) patients.MethodsConsecutive case series methodology over a 6-month period in an urban, tertiary care teaching hospital. Emergency physicians (EPs) were recruited to flag discrepant DI interpretations by radiology trainees that the EP deemed clinically significant. Cases were characterized using chart review and EP interview.ResultsTwenty-eight discrepant reports were identified (representing 0.1% of 18,185 images interpreted). The mean time between provisional discrepant diagnosis (PDDx) and revised diagnosis (RDx) by attending radiology staff was 8.6 h (median 4.8 h, range 1.1-48.4), and 67.9% (n = 19) of the patients had left the ED by time of notification. The most frequently reported PDDx was CT abd/pelvis (32.1%, n = 9) and CT head (28.6%, n = 8). The impact of RDx was deemed major in 57.1% (n = 16) for reasons including altered admitting status (32.1%, n = 9), immediate subspecialty referral (n = 16, 57.1%), impact on management (25%, n = 7), and surgical management (21.4%, n = 6). EPs reported likely perceived impact of PDDx as resulting in increased pain (17. 9%, n = 5), morbidity (10.7%, n = 3), and prolonged hospitalization (25%, n = 7), but not altered long-term outcome or mortality.ConclusionsRelatively few clinically important discrepant reads were reported. Revised diagnosis (RDx) was associated with major clinical impact in 57.1% of reports, but few patients experienced increased morbidity, and none increased mortality. The importance of expedient communication of discrepant reports by staff radiologists is stressed, as is EP verification of patient contact information prior to discharge.

Noncompletion of referrals to outpatient specialty clinics among patients discharged from the emergency department: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE We sought to characterize patients who are referred from the emergency department (ED) to specialty clinics but do not complete the referral, and to identify reasons for their failure to follow up. METHODS A prospective cohort study was carried out over 3 months of patients who were discharged from the ED of a teaching hospital with referral to internal medicine, cardiology or neurology clinics, but who did not complete the referral. Information on demographics, barriers to care and reasons for not completing the referral was obtained through a standardized telephone interview. RESULTS Of 171 ED referrals, 42 (24.6%) were not completed. Interviews were completed for 71.4% (30 patients). Of the nonattenders, 80% were functional in English and most had high school (73.1%) or university (60.7%) education. Virtually all (93.0%) interviewees could get to hospital by themselves or have someone take them. Only 42.9% (12 patients) understood why the emergency physician (EP) requested consultation, and 42.9% (12 patients) described EP instructions as poor or fair. Primary reasons for noncompletion of consult were patient choice (46.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 27.1%-66.2%), physical or social barriers (13.3%, 95% CI 0.0%-27.2%), communication failure (20%, 95% CI 4.0%-36.0%) and consultants refusal of the consultation (20% [95% CI 4.0%-36.0%]). All consultant refusals were from one internal medicine clinic, representing 42% (8/19) of ED referrals to that clinic. None of the 6 patients interviewed who were declined consultation was aware that their consultation had been refused. CONCLUSION Patients discharged by the EP with referral to specialty clinics frequently do not complete the consultation. Causes for failure to follow up relate to patient decision, inadequate or poorly understood discharge information, and system factors. Institutional audits of patients who fail to complete follow-up may reveal unanticipated barriers to care.

Evaluating the impact of environmental interventions across 2 countries: the International Bikeshare Impacts on Cycling and Collisions Study (IBICCS) Study protocol

BackgroundFew international studies examine public bicycle share programs (PBSP) health impacts. We describe the protocol for the International Bikeshare Impacts on Cycling and Collisions Study (IBICCS).MethodsA quasi-experimental non-equivalent groups design was used. Intervention cities (Montreal, Toronto, Boston, New York and Vancouver) were matched to control cities (Chicago, Detroit, and Philadelphia) on total population, population density, cycling rates, and average yearly temperature. The study used three repeated, cross-sectional surveys in intervention and control cities in Fall 2012 (baseline), 2013 (year 1), and 2014 (year 2). A non-probabilistic online panel survey with a sampling frame of individuals residing in and around areas where PBSP are/would be implemented was used. A total of 12,000 respondents will be sampled. In each of the 8 cities 1000 respondents will be sampled with an additional 4000 respondents sampled based on the total population of the city. Survey questions include measures of self-rated health, and self-reported height and weight, knowledge and experience using PBSP, physical activity, bicycle helmet use and history of collisions and injuries while cycling, socio-demographic questions, and home/workplace locations. Respondents could complete questionnaires in English, French, and Spanish. Two weights will be applied to the data: inverse probability of selection and post-stratification on age and sex.A triple difference analysis will be used. This approach includes in the models, time, exposure, and treatment group, and interaction terms between these variables to estimate changes across time, between exposure groups and between cities.DiscussionThere are scientific and practical challenges in evaluating PBSP. Methodological challenges included: appropriate sample recruitment, exchangeability of treatment and control groups, controlling unmeasured confounding, and specifying exposure. Practical challenges arise in the evaluation of environmental interventions such as a PBSP: one of the companies involved filed for bankruptcy, a Hurricane devastated New York City, and one PBSP was not implemented. Overall, this protocol provides methodological and practical guidance for researchers wanting to study PBSP impacts on health.

Personal and trip characteristics associated with safety equipment use by injured adult bicyclists: a cross-sectional study

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate use of helmets, lights, and visible clothing among cyclists and to examine trip and personal characteristics associated with their use.MethodsUsing data from a study of transportation infrastructure and injuries to 690 adult cyclists in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada, we examined the proportion who used bike lights, conspicuous clothing on the torso, and helmets on their injury trip. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine associations between personal and trip characteristics and each type of safety equipment.ResultsBike lights were the least frequently used (20% of all trips) although they were used on 77% of trips at night. Conspicuous clothing (white, yellow, orange, red) was worn on 33% of trips. Helmets were used on 69% of trips, 76% in Vancouver where adult helmet use is required by law and 59% in Toronto where it is not. Factors positively associated with bike light use included night, dawn and dusk trips, poor weather conditions, weekday trips, male sex, and helmet use. Factors positively associated with conspicuous clothing use included good weather conditions, older age, and more frequent cycling. Factors positively associated with helmet use included bike light use, longer trip distances, hybrid bike type, not using alcohol in the 6 hours prior to the trip, female sex, older age, higher income, and higher education.ConclusionsIn two of Canada’s largest cities, helmets were the most widely used safety equipment. Measures to increase use of visibility aids on both daytime and night-time cycling trips may help prevent crashes.