The evaluation of emergency department (ED) quality of care is hampered by the absence of consensus on appropriate measures. We sought to develop a consensus on a prioritized and parsimonious set of evidence-based quality of care indicators for EDs.

The process was led by a nationally representative steering committee and expert panel (representatives from hospital administration, emergency medicine, health information, government, and provincial quality councils). A comprehensive review of the scientific literature was conducted to identify candidate indicators. The expert panel reviewed candidate indicators in a modified Delphi panel process using electronic surveys; final decisions on inclusion of indicators were made by the steering committee in a guided nominal group process with facilitated discussion. Indicators in the final set were ranked based on their priority for measurement. A gap analysis identified areas where future indicator development is needed. A feasibility study of measuring the final set of indicators using current Canadian administrative databases was conducted.

A total of 170 candidate indicators were generated from the literature; these were assessed based on scientific soundness and their relevance or importance. Using predefined scoring criteria in two rounds of surveys, indicators were coded as “retained” (53), “discarded” (78), or “borderline” (39). A final set of 48 retained indicators was selected and grouped in nine categories (patient satisfaction, ED operations, patient safety, pain management, pediatrics, cardiac conditions, respiratory conditions, stroke, and sepsis or infection). Gap analysis suggested the need for new indicators in patient satisfaction, a healthy workplace, mental health and addiction, elder care, and community-hospital integration. Feasibility analysis found that 13 of 48 indicators (27%) can be measured using existing national administrative databases.

A broadly representative modified Delphi panel process resulted in a consensus on a set of 48 evidencebased quality of care indicators for EDs. Future work is required to generate technical definitions to enable the uptake of these indicators to support benchmarking, quality improvement, and accountability efforts.

To establish consensus on the most important clinical decisions paramedics make during high-acuity emergency calls and to visualize these decisions on a process map of an emergency call. A secondary objective was to measure agreement among paramedics and medical director panel members.

A multiround online survey of Canadian paramedics and medical directors. In round 1, participants listed important clinical decisions. In round 2, participants scored each decision in terms of its importance for patient outcome and safety. In rounds 3 and 4, participants could revise their scores. Consensus was defined a priori: 80% or more agreement that a decision was important or extremely important. The included decisions were plotted on a process map of a typical emergency call.

The panel response rates were as follows: round 1, 96%; round 2, 92%; round 3, 83%; and round 4, 96%. Consensus was reached on 42 decisions, grouped into six categories: airway management (n = 13); assessment (n = 3); cardiac management (n = 7); drug administration (n = 9); scene management (n = 4); and general treatment (n = 6). The on-scene treatment phase of the process map was found to have the highest decision density. Paramedics and medical directors differed in their scoring in 5 of 42 decisions (p < 0.05 or less).

Consensus was reached among paramedics and medical directors on 42 decisions important for clinical outcome and patient safety. These decisions were visualized on a process map of an emergency call to learn more about where decision density exists during a typical call.

The ability to teach is a critical component of residency and future practice. This is recognized by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, which incorporates teaching functions into the CanMEDS competencies. The aim of our study was to identify how emergency medicine specialty programs across Canada prepare their residents for roles as teachers and to compare these results to those of other Royal College specialty programs.

A 40-item English questionnaire was developed and translated into French. It was e-mailed to the program directors of all Royal College Emergency Medicine (EM), Anesthesia, Diagnostic Radiology, General Surgery, Internal Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry residency programs. The survey asked what modalities were in use to teach residents how to teach and allowed respondents to comment on recent changes.

Twelve of 13 (92%) EM programs and 78 of 113 (69%) other specialty programs responded. All responding programs incorporated some kind ofmandatory teaching responsibilities. Four of 12 (33%) EM programs reserved formal teaching functions for postgraduate year 3 and above, whereas only 7 of 78 (9%) other specialty programsdid so. The remaining 71 of 78 (91%) non-EM specialty programs incorporated formal teaching functions in all years of residency. Six of 12 (50%) EM programs offered rotations in clinical medical education compared to only 11 of 78 (14%) other specialty programs.

Canadian EM programs appear to differ from other specialty programs in the way that they develop residents-as-teachers. Half of EM programs offer rotations in clinical medical education, and many introduce formal teaching functions later in residency.

To achieve our goal of excellent emergency cardiac care, our institution embarked on a Lean process improvement initiative. We sought to examine and quantify the outcome of this project on the care of suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in our emergency department (ED).

Front-line ED staff participated in several rapid improvement events, using Lean principles and techniques such as waste elimination, supply chain streamlining, and standard work to increase the value of the early care provided to patients with suspected ACS. A chart review was also conducted. To evaluate our success, proportions of care milestones (first electrocardiogram [ECG], ECG interpretation, physician assessment, and acetylsalicylic acid [ASA] administration) meeting target times were chosen as outcome metrics in this before-and-after study.

The proportion of cases with 12-lead ECGs completed within 10 minutes of patient triage increased by 37.4% (p < 0.0001). The proportion of cases with physician assessment initiated within 60 minutes increased by 12.1% (p = 0.0251). Times to ECG, physician assessment, and ASA administration also continued to improve significantly over time (p values < 0.0001). Post-Lean, the median time from ECG performance to physician interpretation was 3 minutes. All of these improvements were achieved using existing staff and resources.

The application of Lean principles can significantly improve attainment of early diagnostic and therapeutic milestones of emergency cardiac care in the ED.

A number of studies have assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) in children; however, the role of the OAR in guiding physician radiograph use is unclear.

The primary purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which Canadian pediatric emergency physicians report using the OAR. Secondary goals included determining current diagnostic and management strategies for Salter-Harris 1 (SH-1) injuries of the ankle and which fractures physicians deem to be clinically significant.

A self-administered piloted survey was distributed by mail to 215 Canadian pediatric emergency physicians using a modified Dillman technique. Participants were selected through Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC), a national network of health care professionals with an interest in pediatric emergency medicine research.

Of 209 surveys, 144 were returned, for a response rate of 68.9%. Of those, 87.5% (126 of 144) reported applying the OAR in children to determine the need for radiographs in acute ankle or midfoot injuries. Of those, 65.1% reported using the OAR always or usually, and 64.5% (93 of 144) of physicians stated that they believe all ankle fractures are clinically significant. Although physicians report that they most commonly order the radiographs, 36.2% of participants indicated that radiographs were requisitioned by nurses or other health care providers at their facilities. SH-1 fractures were reported to be most commonly managed by immobilization (83.3%; 120 of 144), with most patients going on to follow-up with an orthopedic surgeon.

The majority of Canadian pediatric emergency physicians indicate that they use the OAR when assessing children with acute ankle and midfoot injuries. Most physicians believe that all ankle fractures, including SH-1, are clinically significant and have a management preference for immobilization and orthopedic follow-up.