The application of evidence-informed practice in emergency medicine (EM) is critical to improve the quality of patient care. EM is a specialty with a broad knowledge base making it daunting for a junior resident to know where to begin the acquisition of evidence-based knowledge. Our study’s objective was to formulate a list of “top papers” in the field of EM using a Delphi approach to achieve an expert consensus.

Participants were recruited from all 14 specialty EM programs across Canada by a nomination process by the program directors. The modified Delphi survey consisted of three study rounds, each round sent out via email. The study tool was piloted first with McMaster University’s specialty EM residents. During the first round, participants individually listed top papers relevant to EM. During the two subsequent rounds, participants ranked the papers listed in the first round, with a chance to adjust ranking based on group responses.

A total of eight EM specialty programs responded with 30 responses across the three rounds. There were 119 studies suggested in the first round, and, by the third round, a consensus of>70% agreement was reached to generate the final list of 29 studies.

We produced, via an expert consensus, a list of top studies relevant for Canadian EM physicians in training. It can be used as an educational resource for junior residents as they transition into practice.

What is the risk of creating opioid dependence from an ED opioid prescription?

Barnett ML, Olenski AR, Jena AB. Opioid-prescribing patterns of emergency physicians and risk of long-term use. N Engl J Med 2017;376:663-73, doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1610524.

This study examined the risk of creating long-term opioid dependence from a prescription written in an opioid-naive patient in the ED.

Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) is an initiative to encourage patient-physician discussions about the appropriate, evidence based use of medical tests, procedures and treatments. We present the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians’ (CAEP) top five list of recommendations, and the process undertaken to generate them.

The CAEP Expert Working Group (EWG) generated a candidate list of 52 tests, procedures, and treatments in emergency medicine whose value to care was questioned. This list was distributed to CAEP committee chairs, revised, and then divided and randomly allocated to 107 Canadian emergency physicians (EWG nominated) who voted on each item based on: action-ability, effectiveness, safety, economic burden, and frequency of use. The EWG discussed the items with the highest votes, and generated the recommendations by consensus.

The top five CAEP CWC recommendations are: 1) Don’t order CT head scans in adults and children who have suffered minor head injuries (unless positive for a validated head injury clinical decision rule); 2) Don’t prescribe antibiotics in adults with bronchitis/asthma and children with bronchiolitis; 3) Don’t order lumbosacral spinal imaging in patients with non-traumatic low back pain who have no red flags/pathologic indicators; 4) Don’t order neck radiographs in patients who have a negative examination using the Canadian C-spine rules; and 5) Don’t prescribe antibiotics after incision and drainage of uncomplicated skin abscesses unless extensive cellulitis exists.

The CWC recommendations for emergency medicine were selected using a mixed methods approach. This top 5 list was released at the CAEP Conference in June 2015 and should form the basis for future implementation efforts.

To derive and internally validate a clinical decision rule that will rule out major thoracic injury in adult blunt trauma patients, reducing the unnecessary use of chest computed tomographic (CT) scans.

Data were retrospectively obtained from a chart review of all trauma patients presenting to a Canadian tertiary trauma care centre from 2005 to 2008, with those from April 2006 to March 2007 being used for the validation phase. Patients were included if they had an Injury Severity Score > 12 and chest CT at admission or a documented major thoracic injury noted in the trauma database. Patients with penetrating injury, a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score ≤ 8, paralysis, or age < 16 years were excluded.

There were 434 patients in the derivation group and 180 in the validation group who met the inclusion criteria. Using recursive partitioning, five clinical variables were found to be particularly predictive of injury. When these variables were normal, no patients had a major thoracic injury (sensitivity 100% [95% CI 98.4–100], specificity 46.9% [95% CI 44.2–46.9], and negative likelihood ratio 0.00 [95% CI 0.00–0.04]). The five variables were oxygen saturation (< 95% on room air or < 98% on any supplemental oxygen), chest radiograph, respiratory rate ≥ 25, chest auscultation, and thoracic palpation (SCRAP). In the validation group, the same five variables had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 96.2–100%), a specificity of 44.7% (95% CI 39.5–44.7%), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.00 (95% CI 0.00–0.10).

In major blunt trauma with a GCS score > 8, the SCRAP variables have a 100% sensitivity for major thoracic injury in this retrospective study. These findings need to be prospectively validated prior to use in a clinical setting.

Medical licensing bodies and professional colleges require their members to maintain a broad spectrum of knowledge, skills and attitudes, which, when taken together, define a competent emergency physician (EP). The objectives of this pilot study were: 1) to determine the resources used by academic EPs to maintain competence and 2) to determine academic EPs' learning priorities.

Using a modified Dillman method, we surveyed EPs from 2 Canadian academic tertiary health sciences centres.

Thirty-seven (68.5%) of 54 EPs responded. Of those responding, 14 (37.8%) attended grand rounds 3 times or more annually, and 34 (91.7%) attended a medical conference or course at least once annually. Thirty-three (89.2%) respondents read journal articles at least once monthly, with 22 (59.5%) of those reading synopses of original articles. Twenty-three (62.1%) received clinical updates via email, and 11 (29.7%) subscribed to an audio journal or podcast of reviews of original research. Among the CanMEDS roles, Medical Expert, Scholar and Manager were selected as top professional development priorities by more than one-third of respondents. The topics that were not selected as priorities by respondents included patient communication and charting (Communicator); conflict resolution skills and teamwork abilities (Collaborator); advocate for patient and promote health in emergency department populations (Health Advocate) and ethical conflict resolution (Professional).

The results of this pilot study suggest that in order to maintain clinical competence in emergency medicine, traditional formats of professional development (e.g., grand rounds, print media and original research) are being substituted for independent study, online media and reviews of original research. This study also suggests a strong preference for Medical Expert topics, while Professional, Health Advocate, Collaborator and Communicator topics are not a reported priority for professional development.