1) To characterize mild, moderate, and severe fear of falling in older emergency department (ED) patients for minor injuries, and 2) to assess whether fear of falling could predict falls and returns to the ED within 6 months of the initial ED visit.

This study was part of the Canadian Emergency and Trauma Initiative (CETI) prospective cohort (2011–2016). Patients ages ≥ 65, who were independent in their basic daily activities and who were discharged from the ED after consulting for a minor injury, were included. Fear of falling was measured by the Short Falls Efficacy Scale International (SFES-I) in order to stratify fear of falling as mild (SFES-I = 7-8/28), moderate (SFES-I = 9-13/28), or severe (SFES-I = 14-28/28). Many other physical and psychological characteristics where collected. Research assistants conducted follow-up phone interviews at 3 and 6 months’ post-ED visit, in which patients were asked to report returns to the ED.

A total of 2,899 patients were enrolled and 2,009 had complete data at 6 months. Patients with moderate to severe fear of falling were more likely to be of ages ≥ 75, female, frailer with multiple comorbidities, and decreased mobility. Higher baseline fear of falling increased the risk of falling at 3 and 6 months (odds ratio [OR]-moderate-fear of falling: 1.63, p < 0.05, OR-severe-fear of falling 2.37, p < 0.05). Fear of falling positive predictive values for return to the ED or future falls were 7.7% to 17%.

Although a high fear of falling is associated with increased risk of falling within 6 months of a minor injury in older patients, fear of falling considered alone was not shown to be a strong predictor of return to the ED and future falls.

Our study objective was to describe the Canadian emergency medicine (EM) research community landscape prior to the initiation of a nationwide network.

A two-phase electronic survey was sent to 17 Canadian medical schools. The Phase 1 Environmental Scan was administered to department chairs/hospital EM chiefs, to identify EM physicians conducting clinical or educational research. The Phase 2 Survey was sent to the identified EM researchers to assess four themes: 1) geographic distribution, 2) training/career satisfaction, 3) time/financial compensation, and 4) research facilitators/barriers. Descriptive analyses were conducted, and results were stratified by Canadian regions.

A total of 92 EM researchers were identified in Phase 1; 67 (73%) responded to the Phase 2 Survey. Of those, 42 (63%) reported being clinical researchers, and 19 (45%) had a graduate degree. Three provinces encompassed most of the researchers (n = 35). Of the respondents, 61% had a research degree, 66% felt adequately trained for their research career, 73% had financial support, 83% had access to office spaces, 52% had no mentor during their first years of their career, 69% felt satisfied with their research career, and 82% suggested that they will still be conducting research in 5 years.

EM researchers reported being adequately trained, even though only a little over half had a graduate degree. Only two-thirds had financial support, and mentorship was lacking in one-third of the participants. Not all respondents had a form of infrastructure, but most felt optimistic about their careers. The Canadian EM research environment could be improved to ensure better research capacity.

The 2016 Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) updates introduced frailty screening within triage to more accurately code frail patients who may deteriorate waiting for care. The relationship between triage acuity and frailty is not well understood, but may help inform which supplemental geriatric assessments are beneficial to support care in the emergency department (ED). Our objectives were to investigate the relationship between triage acuity and frailty, and to compare their associations with a series of patient outcomes.

We conducted a secondary analysis of the Canadian cohort from a multinational prospective study. Data were collected on ED patients 75 years of age and older from eight ED sites across Canada between November 2009 and April 2012. Triage acuity was assigned using the CTAS, whereas frailty was measured using an ED frailty index. Spearman rank and binary logistic regression were used to examine associations.

A total of 2,153 ED patients were analyzed. No association was found between the CTAS and ED frailty index scores assigned to patients (r = .001; p = 0.99). The ED frailty index was associated with hospital admission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4–1.6), hospital length of stay (OR = 1.4; 95% CI = 1.2–1.6), future hospitalization (OR = 1.1; 95% CI = 1.05–1.2), and ED recidivism (OR = 1.1; 95% CI = 1.04–1.2). The CTAS was associated with hospital admission (e.g., CTAS 2 v. 5; OR = 6; 95% CI = 3.3–11.4).

Our findings demonstrate that frailty and triage acuity are independent but complementary measures. EDs may benefit from comprehensive frailty screening post-triage, as frailty and its associated geriatric syndromes drive outcomes separate from traditional measures of acuity.

Incentive Spirometry is commonly used for respiratory recovery. The literature on incentive spirometry and its impact on patients with rib fracture is unclear and there are no recommendations regarding its use in the Emergency Department (ED), particularly in rib fracture patients, which are known for increasing the risk of pulmonary complication. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the use of incentive spirometry and to measure its impacts on delayed complications in patients discharged from the ED with confirmed rib fracture.

This is a planned sub-study of a prospective observational cohort recruited in 4 Canadians ED between November 2006 and May 2012. Non-admitted patients over 16 y.o. with at least one confirmed rib fracture on radiographs were included. Prescription of incentive spirometry was left to attending physician. Main outcomes were development of pneumonia, atelectasis, and hemothorax within 14 days. Propensity score matching analyses were performed.

439 patients were included and 182 (41.5%) patients received incentive spirometry. There were 99 cases of hemothorax (22.6%), 103 cases of atelectasis (23.5%) and 4 cases of pneumonia (0.9%). The use of incentive spirometry was not protector for hemothorax [RR = 1.03 (0.66–1.64)] and atelectasis or pneumonia [RR = 1.07 (0.68–1.72)].

Our results suggest that unsupervised incentive spirometry use does not have a protective effect against delayed pulmonary complications after rib fracture. Further research should be conducted to assess the usefulness of incentive spirometry in specific injured population in the ED.

Delirium is very frequent in older patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), but is often undetected. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the French version of the 4 A’s Test (4AT-F) for the detection of delirium and cognitive impairment in older patients.

The study was conducted in four Canadian ED. Participants (n= 320) were independent or semi-independent patients (able to perform ≥5 activities of daily living) aged 65 and older and had an 8-hour exposure to the ED environment. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-m), the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) as well as the 4AT-F were administered to patients at the initial interview. The CAM and 4AT-F were then administered twice a day during the patients’ ED or hospital stay. The 4AT-F’s sensitivity and specificity were compared to those of the CAM (for delirium), and to that of the TICS (for cognitive impairment).

Our results suggest that the 4AT-F has a sensitivity of 84% (95% CI: [76, 93]) and a specificity of 74% (95% CI: [70, 78]) for delirium, as well as a sensitivity of 49% (95% CI: [34, 64]) and a specificity of 87% (95% CI: [82, 92]) for cognitive impairment.

The 4AT-F is a fast and reliable screening tool for delirium and cognitive impairment in ED. Due to its quick administration time, it allows a systematic screening of patients at risk of delirium, without significantly increasing the workload of the ED staff.

The objective of this panel was to generate recommendations to promote the engagement of front-line emergency department (ED) clinicians in clinical and implementation research.

Panel members conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 Canadian adult and pediatric emergency medicine researchers to elicit barriers and facilitators to clinician engagement in research activities, and to glean strategies for promoting clinician engagement.

Responses were organized by themes, and, based on these responses, recommendations were developed and refined in an iterative fashion by panel members.

We offer eight recommendations to promote front-line clinician engagement in clinical research activities. Recommendations to promote clinician engagement specifically address the creation of a research-friendly culture in the ED, minimizing the burden of data collection on clinical staff through the careful design of data collection tools and the use of research staff, and communication between researchers and clinical staff to promote adherence to study protocols.

The objective of Panel 2b was to present an overview of and recommendations for the conduct of implementation trials and multicentre studies in emergency medicine.

Panel members engaged methodologists to discuss the design and conduct of implementation and multicentre studies. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 Canadian adult and pediatric emergency medicine researchers to elicit barriers and facilitators to conducting these kinds of studies.

Responses were organized by themes, and, based on these responses, recommendations were developed and refined in an iterative fashion by panel members.

We offer eight recommendations to facilitate multicentre clinical and implementation studies, along with guidance for conducting implementation research in the emergency department. Recommendations for multicentre studies reflect the importance of local study investigators and champions, requirements for research infrastructure and staffing, and the cooperation and communication between the coordinating centre and participating sites.

In the fast pace of the Emergency Department (ED), clinicians are in need of tailored screening tools to detect seniors who are at risk of adverse outcomes. We aimed to explore the usefulness of the Bergman-Paris Question (BPQ) to expose potential undetected geriatric syndromes in community-living seniors presenting to the ED.

This is a planned sub-study of the INDEED multicentre prospective cohort study, including independent or semi-independent seniors (≥65 years old) admitted to hospital after an ED stay ≥8 hours and who were not delirious. Patients were assessed using validated screening tests for 3 geriatric syndromes: cognitive and functional impairment, and frailty. The BPQ was asked upon availability of a relative at enrolment. BPQ’s sensitivity and specificity analyses were used to ascertain outcomes.

A response to the BPQ was available for 171 patients (47% of the main study’s cohort). Of this number, 75.4% were positive (suggesting impairment), and 24.6% were negative. To detect one of the three geriatric syndromes, the BPQ had a sensitivity of 85.4% (95% CI [76.3, 92.0]) and a specificity of 35.4% (95% CI [25.1, 46.7]). Similar results were obtained for each separate outcome. Odds ratio demonstrated a higher risk of presence of geriatric syndromes.

The Bergman-Paris Question could be an ED screening tool for possible geriatric syndrome. A positive BPQ should prompt the need of further investigations and a negative BPQ possibly warrants no further action. More research is needed to validate the usefulness of the BPQ for day-to-day geriatric screening by ED professionals or geriatricians.

We wished to determine the impact of emergency department (ED) mobility assessments for older patients on hospitalization, return visits, future falls, and frailty.

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PEDro, and OTseeker (September 2016). Two independent reviewers identified studies of patients ≥65 years with ED physical mobility assessments and outcomes of hospitalization, return to ED, falls, and frailty. Language was not restricted. Only clinical trials and observational studies were included.

We identified 1,365 unique citations. Nine studies (six cohort and three cross-sectional) met full inclusion criteria. Patients (n=2,513) with mean age 75-85 years, admitted to hospital and discharged, underwent these ED evaluations: Timed Up and Go (TUG), Get Up and Go, tandem walk, and a gait assessment. Study quality was moderate to poor. Tandem walk did not predict falls at 90 days. TUG was not associated with return to the ED/hospitalization at 90 days. Get Up and Go was associated with hospital admission but not return to ED visits at 1 or 3 months. Due to clinical heterogeneity in study populations and outcomes, a meta-analysis was not undertaken.

Despite multiple guidelines recommending a mobility assessment prior to ED discharge for older patients, we found that such assessments were neither associated with nor predictive of adverse outcomes. Robust research is required to guide clinicians on the utility of physical mobility assessments in older ED patients.

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of emergency department (ED) point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) for rib fracture diagnosis in patients with minor thoracic injury (mTI). Secondary objectives were to 1) evaluate patients’ pain during the PoCUS procedure, 2) identify the limitations of the use of PoCUS technique, and 3) compare the diagnosis obtained with PoCUS to radiography results.

Adult patients who presented with clinical suspicion of rib fractures after mTI were included. All patients underwent PoCUS performed by emergency physicians (EPs) prior to a rib view X-ray. A visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 100 was used to ascertain feasibility, patients’ pain and clinicians’ degree of certitude. Feasibility was defined as a score of more than 50 on the VAS. We documented the radiologists’ interpretation of rib view X-ray. Radiologists were blinded to the PoCUS results.

Ninety-six patients were included. A majority (65%) of EPs concluded that the PoCUS technique to diagnose rib fracture was feasible (VAS score > 50). Median score for feasibility was 63. Median score was 31 (Interquartile range [IQR] 5–57) for patients’ pain related to the PoCUS. The main limiting factor of the PoCUS technique was pain during patient examination (15%).

PoCUS examination appears to be a feasible technique for a rib fracture diagnosis in the ED.

The consequences of minor trauma involving a head injury (MT-HI) in independent older adults are largely unknown. This study assessed the impact of a head injury on the functional outcomes six months post-injury in older adults who sustained a minor trauma.

This multicenter prospective cohort study in eight sites included patients who were aged 65 years or older, previously independent, presenting to the emergency department (ED) for a minor trauma, and discharged within 48 hours. To assess the functional decline, we used a validated test: the Older Americans’ Resources and Services Scale. The cognitive function of study patients was also evaluated. Finally, we explored the influence of a concomitant injury on the functional decline in the MT-HI group.

All 926 eligible patients were included in the analyses: 344 MT-HI patients and 582 minor trauma without head injury. After six months, the functional decline was similar in both groups: 10.8% and 11.9%, respectively (RR=0.79 [95% CI: 0.55–1.14]). The proportion of patients with mild cognitive disabilities was also similar: 21.7% and 22.8%, respectively (RR=0.91 [95% CI: 0.71–1.18]). Furthermore, for the group of patients with a MT-HI, the functional outcome was not statistically different with or without the presence of a co-injury (RR=1.35 [95% CI: 0.71–2.59]).

This study did not demonstrate that the occurrence of a MT-HI is associated with a worse functional or cognitive prognosis than other minor injuries without a head injury in an elderly population, six months after injury.

Notre objectif primaire est de mesurer l’incidence d’HPI selon quatre définitions différentes retrouvées dans la littérature. Notre principal objectif secondaire est d’évaluer l’impact de la présence d’instabilité hémodynamique avant l’intubation sur l’incidence d’HPI. Le deuxième objectif secondaire consiste à déterminer l’incidence de l’HPI en fonction de l’intervalle de temps durant lequel la première hypotension survient.

Une cohorte prospective a été constituée par les patients intubés en salle de réanimation à l’hôpital de l’Enfant-Jésus entre le 28/06/2011 et le 12/07/2012. L’HPI était globalement définie comme ≥1 mesure de tension artérielle systolique <90 mmHg suivant l’intubation. Les différentes définitions étudiées faisaient varier le temps de mesure de la tension artérielle (TA) après l’intubation, soit 1) jusqu’à 5 minutes, 2) jusqu’à 15 minutes, 3) jusqu’à 30 minutes et 4) en tout temps lors du séjour en salle de réanimation.

Au cours de la période à l’étude, 155 patients ont été intubés sur place dont 81 patients qui répondaient aux critères d’inclusion. L’incidence de l’HPI pour chaque définition est respectivement de 9.9%, 18.5%, 24.7% et 28.4%. La comparaison entre chacune de ces incidences révèle une différence statistiquement significative (p<0.05), à l’exception des deux dernières. L’incidence cumulative d’HPI à tout moment suivant l’intubation chez les patients présentant une hypotension pré-intubation est de 62.5% (IC 95% 28.5-87.5) en opposition aux patients hémodynamiquement stables en pré-intubation qui présentaient une incidence d’HPI de 24.7% (IC 95% 16.1-35.8).

L’hypotension post-intubation est un effet indésirable fréquent chez les patients au département d’urgence et son incidence varie de façon significative en fonction de la définition temporelle utilisée au sein d’une même cohorte de patients.

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of delayed complications, specifically hemothorax, and functional outcome in patients with isolated sternal fracture discharged from the emergency department (ED) compared to patients with other minor thoracic trauma.

This prospective cohort study was conducted in four university-affiliated Canadian EDs. Patients ages 16 and older discharged from the ED with an isolated minor thoracic injury were included and categorized as isolated sternal fracture, rib fracture, or no fracture. A standardized clinical and radiological follow-up was performed at 7 and 14 days as well as a phone follow-up at 30 and 90 days post-injury. Functional outcome was determined using the Medical Outcome Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12).

A total of 969 patients were included, of whom 32 (3.3%) had an isolated sternal fracture, 304 (31.3%) had rib fracture, and 633 (65.3%) had no fracture. Within 14 days, 112 patients presented with a delayed hemothorax: 12.5% of sternal fracture patients, 23% of rib fracture(s) patients, and 6% of minor thoracic injury patients without fracture (p<0.05). At 90 days, 57.1% of patients with sternal fracture had moderate to severe disability compared to 25.4% and 21.2% for both of the other groups, respectively (p<0.001).

In this prospective study, we found that 12.5% (n=4, p<0.05) of patients with sternal fracture developed a delayed hemothorax, but the clinical significance of this remains questionable. The proportion of patients with sternal fracture who had moderate to severe disability was significantly higher than that of patients with other minor thoracic trauma.