We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save 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 saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
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 saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.
The objective of the CAEP Global Emergency Medicine (EM) panel was to identify successes, challenges, and barriers to engaging in global health in Canadian academic emergency departments, formulate recommendations for increasing engagement of faculty, and guide departments in developing a Global EM program.
Methods
A panel of academic Global EM practitioners and residents met regularly via teleconference in the year leading up to the CAEP 2018 Academic Symposium. Recommendations were drafted based on a literature review, three mixed methods surveys (CAEP general members, Canadian Global EM practitioners, and Canadian academic emergency department leaders), and panel members’ experience. Recommendations were presented at the CAEP 2018 Academic Symposium in Calgary and further refined based on feedback from the Academic Section.
Results
A total of nine recommendations are presented here. Seven of these are directed towards Canadian academic departments and divisions and intend to increase their engagement in Global EM by recognizing it as an integral part of the practice of emergency medicine, deliberately incorporating it into strategic plans, identifying local leaders, providing tangible supports (i.e., research, administration or financial support, shift flexibility), mitigating barriers, encouraging collaboration, and promoting academic deliverables. The final two recommendations pertain to CAEP increasing its own engagement and support of Global EM.
Conclusions
These recommendations serve as guidance for Canadian academic emergency departments and divisions to increase their engagement in Global EM.
Delays in triage processes in the emergency department (ED) can compromise patient safety. The aim of this study was to provide proof-of-concept that a self-check-in kiosk could decrease the time needed to identify ambulatory patients arriving in the ED. We compared the use of a novel automated self-check-in kiosk to identify patients on ED arrival to routine nurse-initiated patient identification.
Methods
We performed a prospective trail with random weekly allocation to intervention or control processes during a 10-week study period. During intervention weeks, patients used a self-check-in kiosk to self-identify on arrival. This electronically alerted triage nurses to patient arrival times and primary complaint before triage. During control weeks, kiosks were unavailable and patients were identified using routine nurse-initiated triage. The primary outcome was time-to-first-identification, defined as the interval between ED arrival and identification in the hospital system.
Results
Median (interquartile range) time-to-first-identification was 1.4 minutes (1.0–2.08) for intervention patients and 9 minutes (5–18) for control patients. Regression analysis revealed that the adjusted time-to-first-identification was 13.6 minutes (95% confidence interval 12.8–14.5) faster for the intervention group.
Conclusion
A self-check-in kiosk significantly reduced the time-to-first-identification for ambulatory patients arriving in the ED.
Patients with cardiovascular diseases are common in the emergency department (ED), and continuity of care following that visit is needed to ensure that they receive evidence-based diagnostic tests and therapy. We examined the frequency of follow-up care after discharge from an ED with a new diagnosis of one of three cardiovascular diseases.
Methods
We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with a new diagnosis of heart failure, atrial fibrillation, or hypertension, who were discharged from 157 non-pediatric EDs in Ontario, Canada, between April 2007 and March 2014. We determined the frequency of follow-up care with a family physician, cardiologist, or internist within seven and 30 days, and assessed the association of patient, emergency physician, and family physician characteristics with obtaining follow-up care using cause-specific hazard modeling.
Results
There were 41,485 qualifying ED visits. Just under half (47.0%) had follow-up care within seven days, with 78.7% seen by 30 days. Patients with serious comorbidities (renal failure, dementia, COPD, stroke, coronary artery disease, and cancer) had a lower adjusted hazard of obtaining 7-day follow-up care (HRs 0.77-0.95) and 30-day follow-up care (HR 0.76-0.95). The only emergency physician characteristic associated with follow-up care was 5-year emergency medicine specialty training (HR 1.11). Compared to those whose family physician was remunerated via a primarily fee-for-service model, patients were less likely to obtain 7-day follow-up care if their family physician was remunerated via three types of capitation models (HR 0.72, 0.81, 0.85) or via traditional fee-for-service (HR 0.91). Findings were similar for 30-day follow-up care.
Conclusions
Only half of patients discharged from an ED with a new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and hypertension were seen within a week of being discharged. Patients with significant comorbidities were less likely to obtain follow-up care, as were those with a family physician who was remunerated via primarily capitation methods.
Ontario established emergency department length-of-stay (EDLOS) targets but has difficulty achieving them. We sought to determine predictors of target time failure for discharged high acuity patients and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions.
Methods
This was a retrospective, observational study of 2012 Sunnybrook Hospital emergency department data. The main outcome measure was failing to meet government EDLOS targets for high acuity discharges and ICU emergency admissions. The secondary outcome measures examined factors for low acuity discharges and all admissions, as well as a run chart for 2015 – 2016 ICU admissions. Multiple logistic regression models were created for admissions, ICU admissions, and low and high acuity discharges. Predictor variables were at the patient level from emergency department registries.
Results
For discharged high acuity patients, factors predicting EDLOS target failure were having physician initial assessment duration (PIAD)>2 hours (OR 5.63 [5.22-6.06]), consultation request (OR 10.23 [9.38-11.14]), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (OR 19.33 [12.94-28.87]), computed tomography (CT) (OR 4.24 [3.92-4.59]), and ultrasound (US) (OR 3.47 [3.13-3.83]). For ICU admissions, factors predicting EDLOS target failure were bed request duration (BRD)>6 hours (OR 364.27 [43.20-3071.30]) and access block (AB)>1 hour (OR 217.27 [30.62-1541.63]). For discharged low acuity patients, factors predicting failure for the 4-hour target were PIAD>2 hours (OR 15.80 [13.35-18.71]), consultation (OR 20.98 [14.10-31.22]), MRI (OR 31.68 [6.03-166.54]), CT (OR 16.48 [10.07-26.98]), and troponin I (OR 13.37 [6.30-28.37]).
Conclusion
Sunnybrook factors predicting failure of targets for high acuity discharges and ICU admissions were hospital-controlled. Hospitals should individualize their approach to shortening EDLOS by analysing its patient population and resource demands.
1) To identify the strengths and challenges of governance structures in academic emergency medicine (EM), and 2) to make recommendations on principles and approaches that may guide improvements.
Methods
Over the course of 9 months, eight established EM leaders met by teleconference, reviewed the literature, and discussed their findings and experiences to arrive at recommendations on governance in academic units of EM. The results and recommendations were presented at the annual Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium, where attendees provided feedback. The updated recommendations were subsequently distributed to the CAEP Academic Section for further input, and the final recommendations were decided by consensus.
Results
The panel identified four governance areas of interest: 1) the elements of governance; 2) the relationships between emergency physicians and academic units of EM, and between the academic units of EM and faculty of medicine; 3) current status of governance in Canadian academic units of EM; and 4) essential elements of good governance. Six recommendations were developed around three themes, including 1) the importance of good governance; 2) the purposes of an academic unit of EM; and 3) essential elements for better governance for academic units of EM. Recommendations included identifying the importance of good governance, recognizing the need to adapt to the different models depending on the local environment; seeking full departmental status, provided it is mutually beneficial to EM and the faculty of medicine (and health authority); using a consultation service to learn from the experience of other academic units of EM; and establishing an annual forum for EM leaders.
Conclusion
Although governance of academic EM is complex, there are ways to iteratively improve the mission of academic units of EM: providing exceptional patient care through research and education. Although there is no one-size-fits-all guide, there are practical recommended steps for academic units of EM to consider.
We conducted a program of research to derive and test the reliability of a clinical prediction rule to identify high-risk older adults using paramedics’ observations.
Methods
We developed the Paramedics assessing Elders at Risk of Independence Loss (PERIL) checklist of 43 yes or no questions, including the Identifying Seniors at Risk (ISAR) tool items. We trained 1,185 paramedics from three Ontario services to use this checklist, and assessed inter-observer reliability in a convenience sample. The primary outcome, return to the ED, hospitalization, or death within one month was assessed using provincial databases. We derived a prediction rule using multivariable logistic regression.
Results
We enrolled 1,065 subjects, of which 764 (71.7%) had complete data. Inter-observer reliability was good or excellent for 40/43 questions. We derived a four-item rule: 1) “Problems in the home contributing to adverse outcomes?” (OR 1.43); 2) “Called 911 in the last 30 days?” (OR 1.72); 3) male (OR 1.38) and 4) lacks social support (OR 1.4). The PERIL rule performed better than a proxy measure of clinical judgment (AUC 0.62 vs. 0.56, p=0.02) and adherence was better for PERIL than for ISAR.
Conclusions
The four-item PERIL rule has good inter-observer reliability and adherence, and had advantages compared to a proxy measure of clinical judgment. The ISAR is an acceptable alternative, but adherence may be lower. If future research validates the PERIL rule, it could be used by emergency physicians and paramedic services to target preventative interventions for seniors identified as high-risk.
Emergency department (ED) crowding is associated with adverse outcomes. Several jurisdictions have established benchmarks and targets for length-of-stay (LOS) to reduce crowding. An evaluation has been conducted on whether performance on Ontario’s ED LOS benchmarks is associated with reduced risk of death or hospitalization.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study of discharged ED patients was conducted using population-based administrative data from Ontario (April 2008 to February 2012). For each ED visit, the proportion of patients seen during the same shift that met ED LOS benchmarks was determined. Performance was categorized as <80%, 80% to <90%, 90% to <95%, and 95%–100% of same-shift ED patients meeting the benchmark. Logistic regression models analysed the association between performance on ED LOS benchmarks and 7-day death or hospitalization, controlled for patient and ED characteristics and stratified by patient acuity.
Results
From 122 EDs, 2,295,256 high-acuity and 1,626,629 low-acuity visits resulting in discharge were included. Deaths and hospitalizations within 7 days totalled 1,429 (0.062%) and 49,771 (2.2%) among high-acuity, and 220 (0.014%) and 9,005 (0.55%) among low-acuity patients, respectively. Adverse outcomes generally increased among patients seen during shifts when a lower proportion of ED patients met ED LOS benchmarks. The adjusted odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) among high- and low-acuity patients seen on shifts when <80% met ED benchmarks (compared with ≥95%) were, respectively, 1.32 (1.05–1.67) and 1.84 (1.21–2.81) for death, and 1.13 (1.08–1.17) and 1.40 (1.31–1.49) for hospitalization.
Conclusions
Better performance on Ontario’s ED LOS benchmarks for each shift is associated with a 10%–45% relative reduction in the odds of death or admission 7 days after ED discharge.
Low socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with adverse health outcomes. Possible explanations include differences in health status, access to health care, and care provided by clinicians. We sought to determine whether SES is associated with computed tomography (CT) use in the emergency department (ED).
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study of all Ontario ED patients (April 1, 2009, to March 31, 2010) using administrative databases was conducted, and patients were stratified into SES quintiles based on median neighbourhood income. Using multivariate logistical regression, CT scan use within SES quintiles was compared for all patients and subgroups based on chief complaints: headache, abdominal pain, and complex abdominal pain (age ≥ 65 years, high acuity, and admittance to hospital).
Results:
We analyzed 4,551,101 patient visits, of which 52% were female. Overall, 8.2% underwent CT scanning. In adjusted analyses, the lowest SES patients were less likely to undergo CT scanning overall and in all clinical subgroups, except for complex abdominal pain. Compared to the lowest SES quintile, the adjusted odds ratios of CT scanning in the highest SES quintile were 1.08 (95% CI 1.07–1.09), 1.28 (95%CI 1.22–1.34), and 1.24 (95% CI 1.21–1.27) for all patients, headache pain patients, and abdominal pain patients, respectively. For patients presenting with complex abdominal pain, no significant difference in CT use was observed.
Conclusion:
Lowest SES ED patients were less likely to receive CT scans overall and in headache and abdominal pain subgroups. No difference was seen among complex abdominal pain patients, suggesting that as clinical indications for the test become more clearcut, use across SES quintiles differs less.
Recently, many Canadian emergency departments (EDs) have struggled with physician staffing shortages. In 2006, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funded a brief “emergency medicine primer” (EMP) course for family physicians to upgrade or refresh skills, with the goal of increasing their ED work intensity. We sought to determine the effect of the EMP on the ED work intensity of family physicians.
Methods:
A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted of the ED work of 239 family physicians in the 2 years before and after a minimum of 6 months and up to 2 years from completing an EMP course in 2006 to 2008 compared to non-EMP physicians. ED work intensity was defined as the number of ED shifts per month and the number of ED patients seen per month. We conducted two analyses: a before and after comparison of all EMP physicians and a matched cohort analysis matching each EMP physician to four non-EMP physicians on sex, year of medical school graduation, rurality, and pre-EMP ED work intensity.
Results:
Postcourse, EMP physicians worked 0.5 more ED shifts per month (13% increase, p = 0.027). Compared to their matched controls, EMP physicians worked 0.7 more shifts per month (13% increase, p = 0.0032) and saw 15 more patients per month (17% increase, p = 0.0008) compared to matched non-EMP physicians. The greatest increases were among EMP physicians who were younger, were urban, had previous ED experience, or worked in a high-volume ED. The effect of the EMP course was negligible for physicians with no previous ED experience or working in rural areas.
Conclusion:
The EMP course is associated with modest increases in ED work intensity among some family physicians, in particular younger physicians in urban areas. No increase was seen among physicians without previous ED experience or working in rural areas.
In Ontario, clinical decision units (CDUs) were implemented as a pilot project in 2008 by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care as part of its strategy to reduce emergency department (ED) waiting times. Our objective was to describe general characteristics of the program at each of the participating sites and to examine barriers and facilitators to integrating CDUs into practice.
Methods:
On-site small-group interviews were conducted in two phases with ED and hospital staff at participating sites, first at 8 to 12 weeks and again at 12 months postimplementation. Interview data were analyzed using the framework approach. Unstructured field notes and CDU clinical care protocols and documentation were also reviewed.
Results:
The qualitative analysis identified 10 key themes related to integrating CDUs into EDs: shift in clinical and operational practice; administrative aspects of implementation; team building and stakeholder involvement; use of clinical care protocols; physical or virtual model of care; responsive ancillary services; involvement of specialist services; coordination with hospital and community supports; appropriate use of the CDU; and ongoing evaluation and monitoring. Each theme represents an important insight from the perspective of clinical and administrative staff at participating sites.
Conclusion:
The implementation of CDUs is a complex process, with no single preferred clinical care or operational model. This study identifies a number of key considerations relevant to the future implementation of CDUs.
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.
Methods:
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.
Results:
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.
Discussion:
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.
The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends a benchmark door-to-electrocardiogram (ECG) time of 10 minutes for acute myocardial infarction patients, but this is based on expert opinion (level of evidence C). We sought to establish an evidence-based benchmark door-to-ECG time.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study used a population-based sample of patients who suffered an ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in Ontario between 1999 and 2001. Using cubic smoothing splines, we described (1) the relationship between door-to-ECG time and ECG-to-needle time and (2) the proportion of STEMI patients who met the benchmark door-to-needle time of 30 minutes based on their door-to-ECG time. We hypothesized nonlinear relationships and sought to identify an inflection point in the latter curve that would define the most efficient (benefit the greatest number of patients) door-to-ECG time.
Results:
In 2,961 STEMI patients, the median door-to-ECG and ECG-to-needle times were 8.0 and 27.0 minutes, respectively. There was a linear increase in ECG-to-needle time as the door-to-ECG time increased, up to approximately 30 minutes, after which the ECG-to-needle time remained constant at 53 minutes. The inflection point in the probability of achieving the benchmark door-to-needle time occurred at 4 minutes, after which it decreased linearly, with every minute of door-to-ECG time decreasing the average probability of achievement by 2.2%.
Conclusions:
Hospitals that are not meeting benchmark reperfusion times may improve performance by decreasing door-to-ECG times, even if they are meeting the current AHA benchmark door-to-ECG time. The highest probability of meeting the reperfusion target time for fibrinolytic administration is associated with a door-to-ECG time of 4 minutes or less.
Managers of emergency departments (EDs), governments and researchers would benefit from reliable data sets that characterize use of EDs. Although Canadian ED lists for chief complaints and triage acuity exist, no such list exists for diagnosis classification. This study was aimed at developing a standardized Canadian Emergency Department Diagnosis Shortlist (CED-DxS), as a subset of the full International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, with Canadian Enhancement (ICD-10-CA).
Methods:
Emergency physicians from across Canada participated in the revision of the ICD-10-CA through 2 rounds of the modified Delphi method. We randomly assigned chapters from the ICD-10-CA (approximately 3000 diagnoses) to reviewers, who rated the importance of including each diagnosis in the ED-specific diagnosis list. If 80% or more of the reviewers agreed on the importance of a diagnosis, it was retained for the final revision. The retained diagnoses were further aggregated and adjusted, thus creating the CED-DxS.
Results:
Of the 83 reviewers, 76% were emergency medicine (EM)–trained physicians with an average of 12 years of experience in EM, and 92% were affiliated with a university teaching hospital. The modified Delphi process and further adjustments resulted in the creation of the CED-DxS, containing 837 items. The chapter with the largest number of retained diagnoses was injury and poisoning (n = 292), followed by gastrointestinal (n = 59), musculoskeletal (n = 55) and infectious disease (n = 42). Chapters with the lowest number retained were neoplasm (n = 18) and pregnancy (n = 12).
Conclusion:
We report the creation of the uniform CED-DxS, tailored for Canadian EDs. The addition of ED diagnoses to existing standardized parameters for the ED will contribute to homogeneity of data across the country.
Timely reperfusion therapy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is an important determinant of outcome, yet targets for time to treatment are frequently unmet in North America. Prehospital strategies can reduce time to reperfusion. We sought to determine the extent to which emergency medical services (EMS) use these strategies in Canada.
Methods:
We carried out a cross-sectional survey in 2007 of ground EMS operators in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. We focused on the use of 4 prehospital strategies: 1) 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), 2) routine expedited emergency department (ED) transfer of STEMI patients (from a referring ED to a percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] centre), 3) prehospital bypass (ambulance bypass of local EDs to transport patients directly to PCI centres) and 4) prehospital fibrinolysis.
Results:
Ninety-seven ambulance operators were surveyed, representing 15 681 paramedics serving 97% of the combined provincial populations. Of the operators surveyed, 68% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59%–77%) had ambulances equipped with 12-lead ECGs, ranging from 40% in Quebec to 100% in Alberta and Nova Scotia. Overall, 47% (95% CI 46%-48%) of paramedics were trained in ECG acquisition and 40% (95% CI 39%–41%) were trained in ECG interpretation. Only 18% (95% CI 10%–25%) of operators had prehospital bypass protocols; 45% (95% CI 35%–55%) had protocols for expedited ED transfer. Prehospital fibrinolysis was available only in Alberta. All EMS operators in British Columbia, Alberta and Nova Scotia used at least 1 of the 4 prehospital strategies, and one-third of operators in Ontario and Quebec used 0 of 4. In major urban centres, at least 1 of the 3 prehospital strategies 12-lead ECG acquisition, bypass or expedited transfer was used, but there was considerable variation within and across provinces.
Conclusion:
The implementation of widely recommended prehospital STEMI strategies varies substantially across the 5 provinces studied, and relatively simple existing technologies, such as prehospital ECGs, are underused in many regions. Substantial improvements in prehospital services and better integration with hospital-based care will be necessary in many regions of Canada if optimal times to reperfusion, and associated outcomes, are to be achieved.
Current guidelines suggest that most patients who present to an emergency department (ED) with chest pain should be placed on a continuous electrocardiographic monitoring (CEM) device. We surveyed emergency physicians to determine their perception of current occupancy rates of CEM and to assess their attitudes toward prescribing monitors for low-risk chest pain patients in the ED.
Methods:
We conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered Internet and mail survey of a random sample of 300 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. Main outcome measures included the perceived frequency of fully occupied monitors in the ED and physicians' willingness to forgo CEM in certain chest pain patients.
Results:
The response rate was 66% (199 respondents). The largest group of respondents (43%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 36%–50%) indicated that monitors were fully occupied 90%–100% of the time during their most recent ED shift. When asked how often they were forced to choose a patient for monitor removal because of the limited number of monitors, 52% (95% CI 45%–60%) of respondents selected 1–3 times per shift. Ninety percent (95% CI 84%–93%) of respondents indicated that they would forgo CEM in certain cardiac chest pain patients if there was good evidence that the risk of a monitor-detected adverse event was very low.
Conclusion:
Emergency physicians report that monitors are often fully occupied in Canadian EDs, and most are willing to forgo CEM in certain chest pain patients. A large prospective study of CEM in low-risk chest pain patients is warranted.
In February 2007, the Health Council of Canada, in its third annual report, emphasized the need for pan-Canadian data on our health care system. To date, no studies have examined the strengths and weaknesses of emergency health services (EHS) administrative databases, as perceived by researchers. We undertook a qualitative study to determine, from a researcher's perspective, the strengths and weaknesses of EHS administrative databases. The study also elicited researchers' suggestions to improve these databases.
Methods:
We conducted taped interviews with 4 Canadian health services researchers. The transcriptions were subsequently examined for common concepts, which were finalized after discussion with all the investigators.
Results:
Five common themes emerged from the interviews: clinical detail, data quality, data linkage, data use and population coverage. Data use and data linkages were considered strengths. Clinical detail, data quality and population coverage were considered weaknesses.
Conclusion:
The 5 themes that emerged from this study all serve to reinforce the call from the Health Council of Canada for national data on emergency services, which could be readily captured through a national EHS administrative database. We feel that key stakeholders involved in emergency services across Canada should work together to develop a strategy to implement an accurate, clinically detailed, integrated and comprehensive national EHS database.