Search

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in care of older adults in cancer treatment trials and emergency department (ED) use exist. This report provides a baseline description of older adults ≥65 years old who present to the ED with active cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network observational ED cohort study sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. Of 1564 eligible adults with active cancer, 1075 patients were prospectively enrolled, of which 505 were ≥ 65 years old. We recruited this convenience sample from eighteen participating sites across the United States between February 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. RESULTS: Compared to cancer patients younger than 65 years of age, older adults were more likely to be transported to the ED by emergency medical services, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and be admitted despite no significant difference in acuity as measured by the Emergency Severity Index. Despite the higher admission rate, no significant difference was noted in hospitalization length of stay, 30-day mortality, ED revisit or hospital admission within 30 days after the index visit. Three of the top five ED diagnoses for older adults were symptom-related (fever of other and unknown origin, abdominal and pelvic pain, and pain in throat and chest). Despite this, older adults were less likely to report symptoms and less likely to receive symptomatic treatment for pain and nausea than the younger comparison group. Both younger and older adults reported a higher symptom burden on the patient reported Condensed Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale than to ED providers. When treating suspected infection, no differences were noted in regard to administration of antibiotics in the ED, admissions, or length of stay ≤2 days for those receiving ED antibiotics. DISCUSSION: We identified several differences between older (≥65 years old) and younger adults with active cancer seeking emergency care. Older adults frequently presented for symptom-related diagnoses but received fewer symptomatic interventions in the ED suggesting that important opportunities to improve the care of older adults with cancer in the ED exist.

Background: Older adults with cancer use the emergency department (ED) for acute concerns. Objectives: Characterize the palliative care needs and clinical outcomes of advanced cancer patients in the ED. Design: A planned secondary data analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN) data. Settings/Subjects: Cancer patients who presented to the 18 CONCERN affiliated EDs in the United States. Measurements: Survey included demographics, cancer type, functional status, symptom burden, palliative and hospice care enrollment, and advance directive code status. Results: Of the total (674/1075, 62.3%) patients had advanced cancer and most were White (78.6%) and female (50.3%); median age was 64 (interquartile range 54-71) years. A small proportion of them were receiving palliative (6.5% [95% confidence interval; CI 3.0-7.6]; p = 0.005) and hospice (1.3% [95% CI 1.0-3.2]; p = 0.52) care and had a higher 30-day mortality rate (8.3%, [95% CI 6.2-10.4]). Conclusions: Patients with advanced cancer continue to present to the ED despite recommendations for early delivery of palliative care.

PURPOSE: Emergency department (ED) visits by patients with cancer frequently end in hospitalization. As concerns about ED and hospital crowding increase, observation unit care may be an important strategy to deliver safe and efficient treatment for eligible patients. In this investigation, we compared the prevalence and clinical characteristics of cancer patients who received observation unit care with those who were admitted to the hospital from the ED. METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with cancer presenting to an ED affiliated with one of 18 hospitals of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergency Research Network (CONCERN) between March 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. We compared patient characteristics with the prevalence of observation unit care usage, hospital admission, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 1051 enrolled patients, 596 (56.7%) were admitted as inpatients, and 72 (6.9%) were placed in an observation unit. For patients admitted as inpatients, 23.7% had a length of stay ≤2 days. The conversion rate from observation to inpatient was 17.1% (95% CI 14.6-19.4) among those receiving care in an observation unit. The average observation unit length of stay was 14.7 h. Patient factors associated ED disposition to observation unit care were female gender and low Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, the discrepancy between observation unit care use and short inpatient hospitalization may represent underutilization of this resource and a target for process change.

BackgroundMcKesson's InterQual criteria are widely used in hospitals to determine if patients should be classified as observation or inpatient status, but the accuracy of the criteria is unknown.ObjectiveWe sought to determine whether InterQual criteria accurately predicted length of stay (LOS) in older patients with syncope.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a cohort study of adults ≥60 years of age who had syncope. We calculated InterQual criteria and classified the patient as observation or inpatient status. Outcomes were whether LOS were less than or greater than 2 midnights.ResultsWe analyzed 2361 patients; 1227 (52.0%) patients were male and 1945 (82.8%) were white, with a mean age of 73.2 ± 9.0 years. The median LOS was 32.6 h (interquartile range 24.2-71.8). The sensitivity of InterQual criteria for LOS was 60.8% (95% confidence interval 57.9-63.6%) and the specificity was 47.8% (95% confidence interval 45.0-50.5%).ConclusionsIn older adults with syncope, those who met InterQual criteria for inpatient status had longer LOS compared with those who did not; however, the accuracy of the criteria to predict length of stay over 2 days is poor, with a sensitivity of 60% and a specificity of 48%. Future research should identify criteria to improve LOS prediction.

Study objectiveOlder adults with syncope are commonly treated in the emergency department (ED). We seek to derive a novel risk-stratification tool to predict 30-day serious cardiac outcomes.MethodsWe performed a prospective, observational study of older adults (≥60 years) with unexplained syncope or near syncope who presented to 11 EDs in the United States. Patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED were excluded. We collected clinical and laboratory data on all patients. Our primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality or serious cardiac outcome.ResultsWe enrolled 3,177 older adults with unexplained syncope or near syncope between April 2013 and September 2016. Mean age was 73 years (SD 9.0 years). The incidence of the primary outcome was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9% to 6.5%). Using Bayesian logistic regression, we derived the FAINT score: history of heart failure, history of cardiac arrhythmia, initial abnormal ECG result, elevated pro B-type natriuretic peptide, and elevated high-sensitivity troponin T. A FAINT score of 0 versus greater than or equal to 1 had sensitivity of 96.7% (95% CI 92.9% to 98.8%) and specificity 22.2% (95% CI 20.7% to 23.8%), respectively. The FAINT score tended to be more accurate than unstructured physician judgment: area under the curve 0.704 (95% CI 0.669 to 0.739) versus 0.630 (95% CI 0.589 to 0.670).ConclusionAmong older adults with syncope or near syncope of potential cardiac cause, a FAINT score of zero had a reasonably high sensitivity for excluding death and serious cardiac outcomes at 30 days. If externally validated, this tool could improve resource use for this common condition.

BackgroundSyncope is a common chief complaint among older adults in the Emergency Department (ED), and orthostatic vital signs are often a part of their evaluation. We assessed whether abnormal orthostatic vital signs in the ED are associated with composite 30-day serious outcomes in older adults presenting with syncope.MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of a prospective, observational study at 11 EDs in adults ≥ 60 years who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients lost to follow up. We used the standard definition of abnormal orthostatic vital signs or subjective symptoms of lightheadedness upon standing to define orthostasis. We determined the rate of composite 30-day serious outcomes, including those during the index ED visit, such as cardiac arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, cardiac intervention, new diagnosis of structural heart disease, stroke, pulmonary embolism, aortic dissection, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, hemorrhage/anemia requiring transfusion, with major traumatic injury from fall, recurrent syncope, and death) between the groups with normal and abnormal orthostatic vital signs.ResultsThe study cohort included 1974 patients, of whom 51.2% were male and 725 patients (37.7%) had abnormal orthostatic vital signs. Comparing those with abnormal to those with normal orthostatic vital signs, we did not find a difference in composite 30-serious outcomes (111/725 (15.3%) vs 184/1249 (14.7%); unadjusted odds ratio, 1.05 [95%CI, 0.81-1.35], p = 0.73). After adjustment for gender, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), history of arrhythmia, dyspnea, hypotension, any abnormal ECG, physician risk assessment, medication classes and disposition, there was no association with composite 30-serious outcomes (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95%CI, 0.62-1.09], p = 0.18).ConclusionsIn a cohort of older adult patients presenting with syncope who were able to have orthostatic vital signs evaluated, abnormal orthostatic vital signs did not independently predict composite 30-day serious outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with active cancer account for a growing percentage of all emergency department (ED) visits and have a unique set of risks related to their disease and its treatments. Effective triage for this population is fundamental to facilitating their emergency care. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the validity of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI; version 4) triage tool to predict ED-relevant outcomes among adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified analysis of the observational cohort established by the National Cancer Institute-supported Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Networks multicenter (18 sites) study of ED visits by patients with active cancer (N = 1075). We used a series of χ2 tests for independence to relate ESI scores with 1) disposition, 2) ED resource use, 3) hospital length of stay, and 4) 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1008 subjects included in this analysis, the ESI distribution skewed heavily toward high acuity (>95% of subjects had an ESI level of 1, 2, or 3). ESI was significantly associated with patient disposition and ED resource use (p values

Study objectiveMany adults with syncope are hospitalized solely for observation and testing. We seek to determine whether hospitalization versus outpatient management for older adults with unexplained syncope is associated with a reduction in postdisposition serious adverse events at 30 days.MethodsWe performed a propensity score analysis using data from a prospective, observational study of older adults with unexplained syncope or near syncope who presented to 11 emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. We enrolled adults (≥60 years) who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED. Clinical and laboratory data were collected on all patients. The primary outcome was rate of post-ED serious adverse events at 30 days.ResultsWe enrolled 2,492 older adults with syncope and no serious ED diagnosis from April 2013 to September 2016. Mean age was 73 years (SD 8.9 years), and 51% were women. The incidence of serious adverse events within 30 days after the index visit was 7.4% for hospitalized patients and 3.19% for discharged patients, representing an unadjusted difference of 4.2% (95% confidence interval 2.38% to 6.02%). After propensity score matching on risk of hospitalization, there was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events at 30 days between the hospitalized group (4.89%) and the discharged group (2.82%) (risk difference 2.07%; 95% confidence interval -0.24% to 4.38%).ConclusionIn our propensity-matched sample of older adults with unexplained syncope, for those with clinical characteristics similar to that of the discharged cohort, hospitalization was not associated with improvement in 30-day serious adverse event rates.

Almost 20% of patients with syncope will experience another event. It is unknown whether recurrent syncope is a marker for a higher or lower risk etiology of syncope. The goal of this study is to determine whether older adults with recurrent syncope have a higher likelihood of 30-day serious clinical events than patients experiencing their first episode.MethodsThis study is a pre-specified secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective, observational study conducted at 11 emergency departments in the US. Adults 60 years or older who presented with syncope or near syncope were enrolled. The primary outcome was occurrence of 30-day serious outcome. The secondary outcome was 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmia. In multivariate analysis, we assessed whether prior syncope was an independent predictor of 30-day serious events.ResultsThe study cohort included 3580 patients: 1281 (35.8%) had prior syncope and 2299 (64.2%) were presenting with first episode of syncope. 498 (13.9%) patients had 1 prior episode while 771 (21.5%) had >1 prior episode. Those with recurrent syncope were more likely to have congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, previous diagnosis of arrhythmia, and an abnormal ECG. Overall, 657 (18.4%) of the cohort had a serious outcome by 30 days after index ED visit. In multivariate analysis, we found no significant difference in risk of events (adjusted odds ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval 0.90-1.31; p = 0.387).ConclusionIn older adults with syncope, a prior history of syncope within the year does not increase the risk for serious 30-day events.

OBJECTIVES:An estimated 1.2 million annual emergency department (ED) visits for syncope/near syncope occur in the United States. Cardiac biomarkers are frequently obtained during the ED evaluation, but the prognostic value of index high-sensitivity troponin (hscTnT) and natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are unclear. The objective of this study was to determine if hscTnT and NT-proBNP drawn in the ED are independently associated with 30-day death/serious cardiac outcomes in adult patients presenting with syncope. METHODS:A prespecified secondary analysis of a prospective, observational trial enrolling participants ≥ age 60 presenting with syncope, at 11 United States hospitals, was conducted between April 2013 and September 2016. Exclusions included seizure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, trauma, intoxication, hypoglycemia, persistent confusion, mechanical/electrical invention, prior enrollment, or predicted poor follow-up. Within 3 hours of consent, hscTnT and NT-proBNP were collected and later analyzed centrally using Roche Elecsys Gen 5 STAT and 2010 Cobas, respectively. Primary outcome was combined 30-day all-cause mortality and serious cardiac events. Adjusting for illness severity, using multivariate logistic regression analysis, variations between primary outcome and biomarkers were estimated, adjusting absolute risk associated with ranges of biomarkers using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. RESULTS:The cohort included 3,392 patients; 367 (10.8%) experienced the primary outcome. Adjusted absolute risk for the primary outcome increased with hscTnT and NT-proBNP levels. HscTnT levels ≤ 5 ng/L were associated with a 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3%-5%) outcome risk, and hscTnT > 50 ng/L, a 29% (95% CI = 26%-33%) risk. NT-proBNP levels ≤ 125 ng/L were associated with a 4% (95% CI = 4%-5%) risk, and NT-proBNP > 2,000 ng/L a 29% (95% CI = 25%-32%) risk. Likelihood ratios and predictive values demonstrated similar results. Sensitivity analyses excluding ED index serious outcomes demonstrated similar findings. CONCLUSIONS:hscTnT and NT-proBNP are independent predictors of 30-day death and serious outcomes in older ED patients presenting with syncope.

Study objectiveControversy remains in regard to the risk of adverse events for patients presenting with syncope compared with near-syncope. The purpose of our study is to describe the difference in outcomes between these groups in a large multicenter cohort of older emergency department (ED) patients.MethodsFrom April 28, 2013, to September 21, 2016, we conducted a prospective, observational study across 11 EDs in adults (≥60 years) with syncope or near-syncope. A standardized data extraction tool was used to collect information during their index visit and at 30-day follow-up. Our primary outcome was the incidence of 30-day death or serious clinical events. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusting for relevant demographic or historical variables.ResultsA total of 3,581 patients (mean age 72.8 years; 51.6% men) were enrolled in the study. There were 1,380 patients (39%) presenting with near-syncope and 2,201 (61%) presenting with syncope. Baseline characteristics revealed a greater incidence of congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, previous arrhythmia, nonwhite race, and presenting dyspnea in the near-syncope compared with syncope cohort. There were no differences in the primary outcome between the groups (near-syncope 18.7% versus syncope 18.2%). A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified no difference in 30-day serious outcomes for patients with near-syncope (odds ratio 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.14) compared with syncope.ConclusionNear-syncope confers risk to patients similar to that of syncope for the composite outcome of 30-day death or serious clinical event.

BackgroundSyncope is a common reason for visiting the emergency department (ED) and is associated with significant healthcare resource utilization.ObjectiveTo develop a risk-stratification tool for clinically significant findings on echocardiography among older adults presenting to the ED with syncope or nearsyncope.DesignProspective, observational cohort study from April 2013 to September 2016.SettingEleven EDs in the United States.PatientsWe enrolled adults (=60 years) who presented to the ED with syncope or near-syncope who underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE).MeasurementsThe primary outcome was a clinically significant finding on TTE. Clinical, electrocardiogram, and laboratory variables were also collected. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of significant findings on echocardiography.ResultsA total of 3,686 patients were enrolled. Of these, 995 (27%) received echocardiography, and 215 (22%) had a significant finding on echocardiography. Regression analysis identified five predictors of significant finding: (1) history of congestive heart failure, (2) history of coronary artery disease, (3) abnormal electrocardiogram, (4) high-sensitivity troponin-T >14 pg/mL, and 5) N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide >125 pg/mL. These five variables make up the ROMEO (Risk Of Major Echocardiography findings in Older adults with syncope) criteria. The sensitivity of a ROMEO score of zero for excluding significant findings on echocardiography was 99.5% (95% CI: 97.4%-99.9%) with a specificity of 15.4% (95% CI: 13.0%-18.1%).ConclusionsIf validated, this risk-stratification tool could help clinicians determine which syncope patients are at very low risk of having clinically significant findings on echocardiography.RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01802398.

ObjectivesSyncope and near-syncope are common in patients with dementia and a leading cause of emergency department (ED) evaluation and subsequent hospitalization. The objective of this study was to describe the clinical trajectory and short-term outcomes of patients who presented to the ED with syncope or near-syncope and were assessed by their ED provider to have dementia.MethodsThis multisite prospective cohort study included patients 60 years of age or older who presented to the ED with syncope or near-syncope between 2013 and 2016. We analyzed a subcohort of 279 patients who were identified by the treating ED provider to have baseline dementia. We collected comprehensive patient-level, utilization, and outcomes data through interviews, provider surveys, and chart abstraction. Outcome measures included serious conditions related to syncope and death.ResultsOverall, 221 patients (79%) were hospitalized with a median length of stay of 2.1 days. A total of 46 patients (16%) were diagnosed with a serious condition in the ED. Of the 179 hospitalized patients who did not have a serious condition identified in the ED, 14 (7.8%) were subsequently diagnosed with a serious condition during the hospitalization, and an additional 12 patients (6.7%) were diagnosed postdischarge within 30 days of the index ED visit. There were seven deaths (2.5%) overall, none of which were cardiac-related. No patients who were discharged from the ED died or had a serious condition in the subsequent 30 days.ConclusionsPatients with perceived dementia who presented to the ED with syncope or near-syncope were frequently hospitalized. The diagnosis of a serious condition was uncommon if not identified during the initial ED assessment. Given the known iatrogenic risks of hospitalization for patients with dementia, future investigation of the impact of goals of care discussions on reducing potentially preventable, futile, or unwanted hospitalizations while improving goal-concordant care is warranted.

Study objectiveCardiac arrhythmia is a life-threatening condition in older adults who present to the emergency department (ED) with syncope. Previous work suggests the initial ED ECG can predict arrhythmia risk; however, specific ECG predictors have been variably specified. Our objective is to identify specific ECG abnormalities predictive of 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmias in older adults presenting to the ED with syncope.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, observational study at 11 EDs in adults aged 60 years or older who presented with syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients with a serious cardiac arrhythmia diagnosed during the ED evaluation from the primary analysis. The outcome was occurrence of 30-day serous cardiac arrhythmia. The exposure variables were predefined ECG abnormalities. Independent predictors were identified through multivariate logistic regression. The sensitivities and specificities of any predefined ECG abnormality and any ECG abnormality identified on adjusted analysis to predict 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmia were also calculated.ResultsAfter exclusion of 197 patients (5.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7% to 6.2%) with serious cardiac arrhythmias in the ED, the study cohort included 3,416 patients. Of these, 104 patients (3.0%; 95% CI 2.5% to 3.7%) had a serious cardiac arrhythmia within 30 days from the index ED visit (median time to diagnosis 2 days [interquartile range 1 to 5 days]). The presence of nonsinus rhythm, multiple premature ventricular conductions, short PR interval, first-degree atrioventricular block, complete left bundle branch block, and Q wave/T wave/ST-segment abnormalities consistent with acute or chronic ischemia on the initial ED ECG increased the risk for a 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmia. This combination of ECG abnormalities had a similar sensitivity in predicting 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmia compared with any ECG abnormality (76.9% [95% CI 67.6% to 84.6%] versus 77.9% [95% CI 68.7% to 85.4%]) and was more specific (55.1% [95% CI 53.4% to 56.8%] versus 46.6% [95% CI 44.9% to 48.3%]).ConclusionIn older ED adults with syncope, approximately 3% receive a diagnosis of a serious cardiac arrhythmia not recognized on initial ED evaluation. The presence of specific abnormalities on the initial ED ECG increased the risk for 30-day serious cardiac arrhythmias.

Loss to follow-up of enrolled patients (a.k.a. attrition) is a major threat to study validity and power. Minimizing attrition can be challenging even under ideal research conditions, including the presence of adequate funding, experienced study personnel, and a refined research infrastructure. Emergency care research is shifting toward enrollment through multisite networks, but there have been limited descriptions of approaches to minimize attrition for these multicenter emergency care studies. This concept paper describes a stepwise approach to minimize attrition, using a case example of a multisite emergency department prospective cohort of over 3,000 patients that has achieved a 30-day direct phone follow-up attrition rate of

ObjectivesClinical prediction models for risk stratification of older adults with syncope or near syncope may improve resource utilization and management. Predictors considered for inclusion into such models must be reliable. Our primary objective was to evaluate the inter-rater agreement of historical, physical examination, and electrocardiogram (ECG) findings in older adults undergoing emergency department (ED) evaluation for syncope or near syncope. Our secondary objective was to assess the level of agreement between clinicians on the patient's overall risk for death or serious cardiac outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study at 11 EDs in adults 60 years of age or older who presented with unexplained syncope or near syncope. We excluded patients with a presumptive cause of syncope (e.g., seizure) or if they were unable or unwilling to follow-up. Evaluations of the patient's past medical history and current medication use were completed by treating provider and trained research associate pairs. Evaluations of the patient's physical examination and ECG interpretation were completed by attending/resident, attending/advanced practice provider, or attending/attending pairs. All evaluations were blinded to the responses from the other rater. We calculated the percent agreement and kappa statistic for binary variables. Inter-rater agreement was considered acceptable if the kappa statistic was 0.6 or higher.ResultsWe obtained paired observations from 255 patients; mean (±SD) age was 73 (±9) years, 137 (54%) were male, and 204 (80%) were admitted to the hospital. Acceptable agreement was achieved in 18 of the 21 (86%) past medical history and current medication findings, none of the 10 physical examination variables, and three of the 13 (23%) ECG interpretation variables. There was moderate agreement (Spearman correlation coefficient, r = 0.40) between clinicians on the patient's probability of 30-day death or serious cardiac outcome, although as the probability increased, there was less agreement.ConclusionsAcceptable agreement between raters was more commonly achieved with historical rather than physical examination or ECG interpretation variables. Clinicians had moderate agreement in assessing the patient's overall risk for a serious outcome at 30 days. Future development of clinical prediction models in older adults with syncope should account for variability of assessments between raters and consider the use of objective clinical variables.

Study objectiveOlder adults are frequently hospitalized from the emergency department (ED) after an episode of unexplained syncope. Current admission patterns are costly, with little evidence of benefit. We hypothesize that an ED observation syncope protocol will reduce resource use without adversely affecting patient-oriented outcomes.MethodsThis randomized trial at 5 EDs compared an ED observation syncope protocol to inpatient admission for intermediate-risk adults (≥50 years) presenting with syncope or near syncope. Primary outcomes included inpatient admission rate and length of stay. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and 6-month serious outcomes after hospital discharge, index and 30-day hospital costs, 30-day quality-of-life scores, and 30-day patient satisfaction.ResultsStudy staff randomized 124 patients. Observation resulted in a lower inpatient admission rate (15% versus 92%; 95% confidence interval [CI] difference -88% to -66%) and shorter hospital length of stay (29 versus 47 hours; 95% CI difference -28 to -8). Serious outcome rates after hospital discharge were similar for observation versus admission at 30 days (3% versus 0%; 95% CI difference -1% to 8%) and 6 months (8% versus 10%; 95% CI difference -13% to 9%). Index hospital costs in the observation group were $629 (95% CI difference -$1,376 to -$56) lower than in the admission group. There were no differences in 30-day quality-of-life scores or in patient satisfaction.ConclusionAn ED observation syncope protocol reduced the primary outcomes of admission rate and hospital length of stay. Analyses of secondary outcomes suggest reduction in index hospital costs, with no difference in safety events, quality of life, or patient satisfaction. Our findings suggest that an ED observation syncope protocol can be replicated and safely reduce resource use.

Background: Palliative care interventions in the ED capture high-risk patients at a time of crisis and can dramatically improve patient-centered outcomes.Objective: To understand the facilitators that contributed to the success of the Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) quality improvement pilot intervention.Design: Effectiveness was evaluated through semi-structured interviews. Reach outcomes were measured by percent of all full-time emergency providers (physicians, physician assistants, nurses) who completed the intervention education components and baseline survey assessing attitudes and knowledge on end-of-life care.Participants: Emergency medicine providers affiliated with two medical centers (N = 197). Interviews conducted with six key informants at both institutions.Approach: Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive approaches. Descriptive statistics include reach outcomes and baseline survey results.Key Results: Both sites successfully implemented all components of the intervention and achieved a high level (> 75%) of intervention reach. Two themes emerged as facilitators to successful effectiveness facilitators of PRIM-ER: (1) institutional leadership support and (2) leveraging established quality improvement (QI) processes. Institutional support included leveraging leadership with authority to (a) mandate trainings; (b) substitute PRIM-ER education for normally scheduled education; and (c) provide protected time to implement intervention components. Effectiveness was also enhanced by capitalizing on existing QI processes which included (a) leveraging interdisciplinary partnerships and communication plans and (b) monitoring performance improvement data.Conclusions: Capitalizing on strong institutional leadership support and established QI processes enhanced the reach and effectiveness of the PRIM-ER pilot. These findings will guide the PRIM-ER researchers in scaling up the intervention in the remaining 33 sites, as well as enhance the planning of other complex quality improvement interventions in clinical settings.Registration Details: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109; Grant Number: AT009844-01. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]