To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
We created an instructional waiting room video that explained what patients should expect during their emergency department (ED) visit and sought to determine whether preparing patients using this video would 1) improve satisfaction, 2) decrease perceived waiting room times and 3) increase calls to an outpatient referral line in an ambulatory population.
This serial cross-sectional study took place over a period of 2 months before (control) and 2 months after the introduction of an educational waiting room video that described a typical patient visit to our ED. We enrolled a convenience sample of adult patients or parents of pediatric patients who were triaged to the ED waiting room; a research assistant distributed and collected the surveys as patients were being discharged after treatment. Subjects were excluded if they were admitted. The primary outcome was overall satisfaction measured on a 5-point Likert scale, and secondary outcomes included perceived waiting room time, and the number of outpatient referral-line calls.
There were 1132 subjects surveyed: 551 prevideo and 581 postvideo. The mean age was 38 years (standard deviation [SD] 18), 61% were female and the mean ED length of stay was 5.9 hours (SD 3.6). Satisfaction scores were significantly higher postvideo, with 65% of participants ranking their visit as either “excellent” or “very good,” compared with 58.1% in the prevideo group (p = 0.019); however, perceived waiting room time was not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.24). Patient calls to our specialty outpatient clinic referral line increased from 1.5 per month (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58–2.42) to 4.5 per month (95% CI 1.19–7.18) (p = 0.032). After adjusting for possible covariates, the most significant determinants of overall satisfaction were perceived waiting room time (odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95% CI 0.34–0.48) and having seen the ED waiting room video (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06–1.86).
Preparing patients for their ED experience by describing the ED process of care through a waiting room video can improve ED patient satisfaction and the knowledge of outpatient clinic resources in an ambulatory population. Future studies should research the implementation of this educational intervention in a randomized fashion.
The esophageal detector device (EDD) recently has been found to assess endotracheal (ET) tube placement accurately. This study describes the reliability of the EDD in determining the position of the ET tube in clinical airway situations that are difficult.
This was a prospective, randomized, single-blinded, controlled laboratory investigation. Two airway managers (an emergency-medicine attending physician and a resident) determined ET-tube placement using the EDD in five swine in respiratory arrest. The ET tube was placed in the following clinical airway situations: 1) esophagus; 2) esophagus with 1 liter of air instilled; 3) trachea; 4) trachea with 5 ml/kg water instilled; and 5) right mainstem bronchus. Anatomic location of the tube was verified by thoracotomy of the left side of the chest.
There was 100% correlation between the resident and attending physician's use of the EDD. The EDD was 100% accurate in determining tube placement in the esophagus, in the esophagus with 1 liter of air instilled, in the trachea, and in the right mainstem bronchus. The airway managers were only 80% accurate in detecting tracheal intubations when fluid was present.
The EDD is an accurate and reliable device for detecting ET-tube placement in most clinical situations. Tube placement in fluid-filled trachea, lungs, or both, which occurs in pulmonary edema and drowning, may not be detected using this device.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.