Search

Background Palpitations are a common emergency department (ED) complaint, yet relatively little research exists on this topic from an emergency care perspective. Objectives We sought to describe the perceptions and clinical decision-making processes of emergency physicians (EP) surrounding patients with palpitations. Methods We conducted 21 semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of EPs. We recruited participants from academic and community practice settings from four regions of the United States. The transcribed interviews were analyzed using a combination of structural coding and grounded theory approaches with ATLAS.ti, a qualitative data analysis software program (version 7; Atlas.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin, Germany). Results EPs perceive palpitations to be a common but generally benign chief complaint. EPs' clinical approach to palpitations, with regards to testing, treatment, and ED management, can be classified as relating to one or more of the following themes: 1) risk stratification, 2) diagnostic categorization, 3) algorithmic management, and 4) case-specific gestalt. With regard to disposition decisions, four main themes emerged: 1) presence of a serious diagnosis, 2) perceived need for further cardiac testing/monitoring, 3) presence of key associated symptoms, 4) request of other physician or patient desire. The interrater reliability exercise yielded a Fleiss' kappa measure of 0.69, indicating substantial agreement between coders. Conclusion EPs perceive palpitations to be a common but generally benign chief complaint. EPs rely on one or more of four main clinical approaches to manage these patients. These findings could help guide future efforts at developing risk-stratification tools and clinical algorithms for patients with palpitations.

There is an urgent need for in vitro dissolution test setups for intramuscularly applied dosage forms. Especially biorelevant methods are needed to predict the in vivo behavior of newly developed dosage forms in a realistic way. There is a lack of knowledge regarding critical in vivo parameters influencing the release and absorption behavior of an intramuscularly applied drug. In the presented work the focus was set on the simulation of blood perfusion and muscle tissue. A solid agarose gel, being incorporated in an open-pored foam, was used to mimic the gel phase of muscle tissue and implemented in a flow through cell. An aqueous solution of fluorescein sodium was injected. Compared to recently obtained in vivo results the distribution of the model substance was very slow. Furthermore an agarose gel of lower viscosity an open-pored foam and phosphate buffer saline pH 7.4 were implemented in a multi-channel-ceramic membrane serving as a holder for the muscle imitating material. Blood simulating release medium was perfused through the ceramic membrane including filling materials. Transport of the dissolved fluorescein sodium was, in case of the gel, not only determined by diffusion but also by convective transport processes. The more realistic the muscle simulating materials were constituted the less reproducible results were obtained with the designed test setups.

We prospectively evaluated the correlation between point-of-care [beta]-OHB values and DKA severity at time of initial diagnosis in 54 patients. The correlation coefficients between [beta]-OHB and pH, bicarbonate and anion gap were 0.33, 0.25 and 0.16, respectively. We conclude that point-of-care [beta]-OHB absolute values cannot reliably assess DKA severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A single high-sensitivity troponin-T (hs-TnT) measurement may be sufficient to risk-stratify emergency department (ED) patients with possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS) using the recalibrated History, Electrocardiogram, Age, Risk Factors, Troponin (rHEART) score. We sought to validate this approach in a multiethnic population of United States patients and investigate gender-specific differences in performance. We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of adult ED patients with possible ACS at a single, urban, academic hospital. We investigated the diagnostic performance of rHEART for the incidence of type-1 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and other major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days, using both single (19 ng/L) and gender-specific (14 ng/L for women, 22 ng/L for men) 99th percentile hs-TnT thresholds. The 821 patients included were 54% women, 57% Hispanic, and 26% Black. Overall, 4.6% of patients had MACE, including 2.4% with AMI. Single-threshold rHEART ≤3 had a sensitivity of 94.4% (95% confidence interval 81% to 99%) and negative predictive values of 99.3% (98% to 100%) for MACE; gender-specific thresholds performed nearly identically. Sensitivity and negative predictive values for AMI were 90.0% (67% to 98%) and 99.3% (97% to 100%). Excluding patients presenting <3 hours from symptom onset improved sensitivity for MACE and AMI to 97.0% (84% to 100%) and 94.1% (71% to 100%). Logistic regression demonstrated odds of MACE increased with higher rHEART scores at a similar rate for men and women. In conclusion, a single initial hs-TnT and rHEART score can be used to risk-stratify male and female ED patients with possible ACS, especially when drawn >3 hours after symptom onset., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Edward Suh reports a relationship with Roche Diagnostics that includes: funding grants. Bryn Mumma reports a relationship with Roche Diagnostics that includes: consulting or advisory. Marc Probst reports a relationship with Roche Diagnostics that includes: non-financial support. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Ionetix that includes: speaking and lecture fees. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with WL Gore and Associates that includes: consulting or advisory and funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Canon Medical Systems Corporation that includes: consulting or advisory and funding grants. Lauren Ranard reports a relationship with Boston Scientific Corporation that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Attralus, Inc. that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with BridgeBio that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with GE Healthcare that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Intellia Therapeutics Inc that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Ionis Pharmaceuticals Inc that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Neovasc Inc that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Roche Medical Systems that includes: funding grants. Andrew Einstein reports a relationship with Pfizer that includes: funding grants. Co-author, AJE, has recieved authorship fees from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare - UpToDate. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Syncope is common in the general population and a common presenting symptom in acute care settings. Substantial costs are attributed to the care of patients with syncope. Current challenges include differentiating syncope from its mimickers, identifying serious underlying conditions that caused the syncope, and wide variations in current management. Although validated risk tools exist, especially for short-term prognosis, there is inconsistent application, and the current approach does not meet patient needs and expectations. Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, such as machine learning methods including natural language processing, can potentially address the current challenges in syncope management. Preliminary evidence from published studies indicates that it is possible to accurately differentiate syncope from its mimickers and predict short-term prognosis and hospitalisation. More recently, AI analysis of electrocardiograms has shown promise in detection of serious structural and functional cardiac abnormalities, which has the potential to improve syncope care. Future AI studies have the potential to address current issues in syncope management. AI can automatically prognosticate risk in real time by accessing traditional and nontraditional data. However, steps to mitigate known problems such as generalisability, patient privacy, data protection, and liability will be needed. In the past AI has had limited impact due to underdeveloped analytical methods, lack of computing power, poor access to powerful computing systems, and availability of reliable high-quality data. All impediments except data have been solved. AI will live up to its promise to transform syncope care if the health care system can satisfy AI requirement of large scale, robust, accurate, and reliable data., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The balance between risk of missing serious disease and potential harms from over testing involves knowledge of the literature, familiarity of clinical guidelines, incorporation of clinical decision tools where appropriate, use of metacognition to be aware of cognitive decisions to respond and use of shared decision-making in the context of a patient's presentation and with the guidance of the clinician., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Many algorithms for emergency department (ED) evaluation of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) using high-sensitivity troponin assays rely on the detection of a "delta," the difference in concentration over a predetermined interval, but collecting specimens at specific times can be difficult in the ED. We evaluate the use of troponin "velocity," the rate of change of troponin concentration over a flexible short interval for the prediction of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 30 days. We conducted a prospective, observational study on a convenience sample of 821 patients who underwent ACS evaluation at a high-volume, urban ED. We determined the diagnostic performance of a novel velocity-based algorithm and compared the performance of 1- and 2-hour algorithms adapted from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) using delta versus velocity. A total of 7 of 332 patients (2.1%) classified as low risk by the velocity-based algorithm experienced a MACE by 30 days compared with 35 of 221 (13.8%) of patients classified as greater than low risk, yielding a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 68.6% to 93.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.9% (95% CI 95.9% to 98.9%). The ESC-derived algorithms using delta or velocity had NPVs ranging from 98.4% (95% CI 96.4% to 99.3%) to 99.6% (95% CI 97.0% to 99.9%) for 30-day MACEs. The NPV of the novel velocity-based algorithm for MACE at 30 days was borderline, but the substitution of troponin velocity for delta in the framework of the ESC algorithms performed well. In conclusion, specimen collection within strict time intervals may not be necessary for rapid evaluation of ACS with high-sensitivity troponin., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Suh was supported by an investigator-initiated industry grant from Roche Diagnostics for this research. Dr. Einstein reports receiving consultant and/or speaker's fees from Ionetix, Wolters Kluwer Healthcare – UpToDate, and W.L. Gore & Associates and research grants or grants pending from Attralus, Canon Medical Systems, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, and W.L. Gore & Associates. Dr. Ranard reports receiving research grants from Boston Scientific. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: Emergency department (ED) evaluations for syncope are common, representing 1.3 million annual US visits and $2 billion in related hospitalizations. Despite evidence supporting risk stratification and outpatient management, variation in syncope hospitalization rates persist. We sought to develop a new quality measure for very low-risk adult ED patients with syncope that could be applied to administrative data., Methods: We developed this quality measure in 2 phases. First, we used an existing prospective, observational ED patient data set to identify a very low-risk cohort with unexplained syncope using 2 variables: age less than 50 years and no history of heart disease. We then applied this to the 2019 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) to assess its potential effect, assessing for hospital-level factors associated with hospitalization variation., Results: Of the 8,647 adult patients in the prospective cohort, 3,292 (38%) patients fulfilled these 2 criteria: age less than 50 years and no history of heart disease. Of these, 15 (0.46%) suffered serious adverse events within 30 days. In the NEDS, there were an estimated 566,031 patients meeting these 2 criteria, of whom 15,507 (2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.48% to 3.00%) were hospitalized. We found substantial variation in the hospitalization rates for this very low-risk cohort, with a median rate of 1.7% (range 0% to 100%; interquartile range 0% to 3.9%). Factors associated with increased hospitalization rates included a yearly ED volume of more than 80,000 (odds ratio [OR] 3.14; 95% CI 2.02 to 4.89) and metropolitan teaching status (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.81)., Conclusion: In summary, our novel syncope quality measure can assess variation in low-value hospitalizations for unexplained syncope. The application of this measure could improve the value of syncope care., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in over 6 million deaths worldwide as of March 2022. Adverse psychological effects on patients and the general public linked to the pandemic have been well documented., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult emergency department (ED) encounters with diagnoses of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes at a tertiary care hospital in New York City from March 15 through July 31, 2020 and compared it with ED encounters during the same time period in the previous 3 years (2017-2019). The relative risk (RR) of these diagnoses was calculated comparing a prepandemic sample to a pandemic sample, accounting for total volume of ED visits., Results: A total of 2816 patient encounters met the inclusion criteria. The study period in 2020 had 31.5% lower overall ED volume seen during the same time period in the previous 3 years (27,874 vs average 40,716 ED encounters). The risk of presenting with anxiety during the study period in 2020 compared to prior 3 years was 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-1.63), for depression was 1.47 (95% CI 1.28-1.69), and for suicidal ideation was 1.05 (95% CI 0.90-1.23). There was an increase in admissions for depression during the pandemic period (15.2% increase, 95% CI 4.6%-25.7%)., Conclusion: There was a relative increase in patients presenting to the ED with complaints of anxiety and depression during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, while absolute numbers remained stable. Our results highlight the importance of acute care-based mental health resources and interventions to support patients during this pandemic., Competing Interests: None to declare., (© 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Objective: Decision aids (DAs) are tools to facilitate and standardize shared decision making (SDM). Although most emergency clinicians (ECs) perceive SDM appropriate for emergency care, there is limited uptake of DAs in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators identified by ECs regarding the implementation of DAs in the emergency department (ED)., Methods: We conducted a qualitative interview study guided by implementation science frameworks. ECs participated in interviews focused on the implementation of DAs for the disposition of patients with low-risk chest pain and unexplained syncope in the ED. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We then iteratively developed a codebook with directed qualitative content analysis., Results: We approached 25 ECs working in urban New York, of whom 20 agreed to be interviewed (mean age, 41 years; 25% women). The following 6 main barriers were identified: (1) poor DA accessibility, (2) concern for increased medicolegal risk, (3) lack of perceived need for a DA, (4) patient factors including lack of capacity and limited health literacy, (5) skepticism about validity of DAs, and (6) lack of time to use DAs. The 6 main facilitators identified were (1) positive attitudes toward SDM, (2) patient access to follow-up care, (3) potential for improved patient satisfaction, (4) potential for improved risk communication, (5) strategic integration of DAs into the clinical workflow, and (6) institutional support of DAs., Conclusions: ECs identified multiple barriers and facilitators to the implementation of DAs into clinical practice. These findings could guide implementation efforts targeting the uptake of DA use in the ED., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2022 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Background and Aims: Increased alcohol consumption has been proposed as a potential consequence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There has been little scrutiny of alcohol use behaviors resulting in hospital visits, which is essential to guide pandemic public policy. We aimed to determine whether COVID-19 peak restrictions were associated with increased hospital visits for alcohol use or withdrawal. Secondary objectives were to describe differences based on age, sex and race, and to examine alcohol-related complication incidence., Design: Multi-center, retrospective, pre-post study., Setting: New York City health system with five participating hospitals., Participants: Adult emergency department encounters for alcohol use, alcoholic gastritis or pancreatitis or hepatitis, alcohol withdrawal syndrome, withdrawal seizure or delirium tremens., Measurements: Age, sex, race, site and encounter diagnosis. Encounters were compared between 2019 and 2020 for 1 March to 31 May., Findings: There were 2790 alcohol-related visits during the 2019 study period and 1793 in 2020, with a decrease in total hospital visits. Of 4583 alcohol-related visits, median age was 47 years, with 22.3% females. In 2020 there was an increase in percentage of visits for alcohol withdrawal [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-1.67] and withdrawal with complications (aOR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.14-1.72), and a decline in percentage of hospital visits for alcohol use (aOR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.59-0.85) and use with complications (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.58-0.88). It is unknown whether use visit changes mirror declines in other chief complaints. The age groups 18-29 and 60-69 years were associated with increased visits for use and decreased visits for withdrawal, as were non-white race groups. Sex was not associated with alcohol-related visit changes despite male predominance., Conclusions: In New York City during the initial COVID-19 peak (1 March to 31 May 2020), hospital visits for alcohol withdrawal increased while those for alcohol use decreased., (© 2021 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

This first Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-1) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic: Recurrent, Low-risk Chest Pain in the Emergency Department. The multidisciplinary guideline panel used The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding eight priority questions for adult patients with recurrent, low-risk chest pain and have derived the following evidence based recommendations: (1) for those >3 h chest pain duration we suggest a single, high-sensitivity troponin below a validated threshold to reasonably exclude acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within 30 days; (2) for those with a normal stress test within the previous 12 months, we do not recommend repeat routine stress testing as a means to decrease rates of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days; (3) insufficient evidence to recommend hospitalization (either standard inpatient admission or observation stay) versus discharge as a strategy to mitigate major adverse cardiac events within 30 days; (4) for those with non-obstructive (<50% stenosis) coronary artery disease (CAD) on prior angiography within 5 years, we suggest referral for expedited outpatient testing as warranted rather than admission for inpatient evaluation; (5) for those with no occlusive CAD (0% stenosis) on prior angiography within 5 years, we recommend referral for expedited outpatient testing as warranted rather than admission for inpatient evaluation; (6) for those with a prior coronary computed tomographic angiography within the past 2 years with no coronary stenosis, we suggest no further diagnostic testing other than a single, normal high-sensitivity troponin below a validated threshold to exclude ACS within that 2 year time frame; (7) we suggest the use of depression and anxiety screening tools as these might have an effect on healthcare use and return emergency department (ED) visits; and (8) we suggest referral for anxiety or depression management, as this might have an impact on healthcare use and return ED visits., (© 2021 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objective: Little is known regarding the specific ways personal protective equipment (PPE) has been used and reused during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The objective of this study was to evaluate the patterns of PPE use and the impact of PPE availability on the attitudes and well-being of an international population of healthcare workers., Methods: This was an online, cross-sectional survey of healthcare workers. The survey was disseminated internationally using social media, specialty society list-serves, and email augmented by snowball sampling to healthcare workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. The survey was conducted between April 13 and May 1, 2020. The primary outcome was self-reported PPE use during aerosol-generating medical procedures. Other outcomes included PPE use during care for respiratory patients in general, PPE reuse, PPE decontamination, and healthcare worker impressions related to their work and the pandemic., Results: A total of 2227 healthcare workers from 23 countries completed the survey. The N95 was the most common respirator among the 1451 respondents who performed aerosol-generating procedures (n = 1050, 72.3%). Overall, 1783 (80.1%) of providers reported general reuse of PPE, which was similar across US regions but less common in Canada, Italy, and Spain. The most commonly reused item of PPE was the N95 respirator, with the majority of respondents who reused PPE reporting N95 reuse (n = 1157, 64.9%). Of the 1050 individuals who wore an N95 mask while performing an aerosol-generating medical procedure, 756 (72%) reported re-using an N95, and 344 (45.5%) reported reuse for >3 days. Qualitative results identified several common themes, including (1) lack of availability of PPE, (2) fear and anxiety as a result of inadequate PPE, (3) potential exposure to family members, and (4) concerns regarding workload and pay., Conclusions: This international survey of healthcare workers found that N95 respirators were commonly used to care for patients with respiratory symptoms with and without aerosol-generating medical procedures. Healthcare workers reported an unprecedented need to reuse PPE that was designed for single-use, specifically the N95 respirator. The reuse of PPE increased the perceived risk for COVID-19 infection and harmed mental health., (© 2021 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Emergency Physicians.)

Objectives: Significant practice variation is seen in the management of syncope in the emergency department (ED). We sought to evaluate the feasibility of performing a randomized controlled trial of a shared decision making (SDM) tool for low-to-intermediate-risk syncope patients presenting to the ED., Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial of adults (≥30 years) with unexplained syncope who presented to an academic ED in the United States. Patients with a serious diagnosis identified in the ED were excluded. Patients were randomized, 1:1, to receive either usual care or a personalized syncope decision aid (SynDA) meant to facilitate SDM. Our primary outcome was feasibility, i.e., ability to enroll 50 patients in 24 months. Secondary outcomes included patient knowledge, involvement (measured with OPTION-5), rating of care, and clinical outcomes at 30 days post-ED visit., Results: After screening 351 patients, we enrolled 50 participants with unexplained syncope from January 2017 to January 2019. The most common reason for exclusion was lack of clinical equipoise to justify SDM (n = 124). Patients in the SynDA arm tended to have greater patient involvement, as shown by higher OPTION-5 scores: 52/100 versus 27/100 (between-group difference = -25.4, 95% confidence interval = -13.5 to -37.3). Both groups had similar levels of clinical knowledge, ratings of care, and serious clinical outcomes at 30 days., Conclusions: Among ED patients with unexplained syncope, a randomized controlled trial of a shared decision-making tool is feasible. Although this study was not powered to detect differences in clinical outcomes, it demonstrates feasibility, while providing key lessons and effect sizes that could inform the design of future SDM trials., (© 2020 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Study Objective: We determine the prevalence of significant intracranial injury among adults with blunt head trauma who are receiving preinjury anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications., Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted from December 2007 to December 2015. Patients were enrolled in 3 emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. Adults with blunt head trauma who underwent neuroimaging in the ED were included. Use of preinjury aspirin, clopidogrel, and warfarin was recorded. Data on direct oral anticoagulants were not specifically recorded. The primary outcome was prevalence of significant intracranial injury on neuroimaging. The secondary outcome was receipt of neurosurgical intervention., Results: Among 9,070 patients enrolled in this study, the median age was 53.8 years (interquartile range 34.7 to 74.3 years) and 60.7% were men. A total of 1,323 patients (14.6%) were receiving antiplatelet medications or warfarin, including 635 receiving aspirin alone, 109 clopidogrel alone, and 406 warfarin alone. Compared with that of patients without any coagulopathy, the relative risk of significant intracranial injury was 1.29 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88 to 1.87) for patients receiving aspirin alone, 0.75 (95% CI 0.24 to 2.30) for those receiving clopidogrel alone, and 1.88 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.75) for those receiving warfarin alone. The relative risk of significant intracranial injury was 2.88 (95% CI 1.53 to 5.42) for patients receiving aspirin and clopidogrel in combination., Conclusion: Patients receiving preinjury warfarin or a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel were at increased risk for significant intracranial injury, but not those receiving aspirin alone. Clinicians should have a low threshold for neuroimaging when evaluating patients receiving warfarin or a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: Older 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., Methods: We 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., Results: We 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)., Conclusion: Among 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., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We sought to assess the frequency, content, and quality of shared decision making (SDM) in the emergency department (ED), from patients' perspectives., Methods: Utilizing a cross-sectional, multisite approach, we administered an instrument, consisting of two validated SDM assessment tools-the CollaboRATE and the SDM-Q-9-and one newly developed tool to a sample of ED patients. Our primary outcome was the occurrence of SDM in the clinical encounter, as defined by participants giving "top-box" scores on the CollaboRATE measure, and the ability of patients to identify the topic of their SDM conversation. Secondary outcomes included the content of the SDM conversations, as judged by patients, and whether patients were able to complete each of the two validated scales included in the instrument., Results: After exclusions, 285 participants from two sites completed the composite instrument. Just under half identified as female (47%) or as white (47%). Roughly half gave top-box scores (i.e., indicating optimal SDM) on the CollaboRATE scale (49%). Less than half of the participants were able to indicate a decision they were involved in (44%), although those who did gave high scores for such conversations (73/100 via the SDM-Q-9 tool). The most frequently identified decisions discussed were admission versus discharge (19%), medication options (17%), and options for follow-up care (15%)., Conclusions: Fewer than half of ED patients surveyed reported they were involved in SDM. The most common decision for which SDM was used was around ED disposition (admission vs. discharge). When SDM was employed, patients generally rated the discussion highly., (© 2019 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Education related to clinical research often focuses on methodology, statistics, ethics, and study design. While knowledge of these conventional skills is essential to the operationalization of research, many "soft" skills related to leadership, communication, and team management are critical to the successful conduct research in the real world. Conducting clinical research in the emergency department is generally a challenging endeavor. Based on our prior experience as clinical researchers and a narrative review of the published literature, we offer nine practical strategies to help junior investigators conduct research. To successfully execute a research study, investigators must know how to motivate their team, create a brand around their study, communicate effectively, maximize clinician and patient engagement, and celebrate victory, among other skills. These skills and strategies are often missing from the formal research education and in peer-reviewed manuscripts but are, in fact, invaluable to the successful development of junior investigators. Thus, we offer the "story behind the study" in an effort to contribute to research education with material that is not typically covered in formal curricula., (© 2019 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Study Objective: Many 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., Methods: We 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., Results: We 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%)., Conclusion: In 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., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: Shared decisionmaking has been promoted as a method to increase the patient-centeredness of medical decisionmaking and decrease low-yield testing, but little is known about its medicolegal ramifications in the setting of an adverse outcome. We seek to determine whether the use of shared decisionmaking changes perceptions of fault and liability in the case of an adverse outcome., Methods: This was a randomized controlled simulation experiment conducted by survey, using clinical vignettes featuring no shared decisionmaking, brief shared decisionmaking, or thorough shared decisionmaking. Participants were adult US citizens recruited through an online crowd-sourcing platform. Participants were randomized to vignettes portraying 1 of 3 levels of shared decisionmaking. All other information given was identical, including the final clinical decision and the adverse outcome. The primary outcome was reported likelihood of pursuing legal action. Secondary outcomes included perceptions of fault, quality of care, and trust in physician., Results: We recruited 804 participants. Participants exposed to shared decisionmaking (brief and thorough) were 80% less likely to report a plan to contact a lawyer than those not exposed to shared decisionmaking (12% and 11% versus 41%; odds ratio 0.2; 95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.31). Participants exposed to either level of shared decisionmaking reported higher trust, rated their physicians more highly, and were less likely to fault their physicians for the adverse outcome compared with those exposed to the no shared decisionmaking vignette., Conclusion: In the setting of an adverse outcome from a missed diagnosis, use of shared decisionmaking may affect patients' perceptions of fault and liability., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Syncope is a common reason for visiting the emergency department (ED) and is associated with significant healthcare resource utilization., Objective: To develop a risk-stratification tool for clinically significant findings on echocardiography among older adults presenting to the ED with syncope or nearsyncope., Design: Prospective, observational cohort study from April 2013 to September 2016., Setting: Eleven EDs in the United States., Patients: We enrolled adults (=60 years) who presented to the ED with syncope or near-syncope who underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE)., Measurements: The 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., Results: A 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%)., Conclusions: If validated, this risk-stratification tool could help clinicians determine which syncope patients are at very low risk of having clinically significant findings on echocardiography., Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01802398., (© 2018 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

Background: Shared decision making in the emergency department (ED) can increase patient engagement for patients presenting with chest pain. However, little is known regarding which factors are associated with actual patient involvement in decision making or patients' desired involvement in emergency care decisions. We examined which factors were associated with patients' actual and desired involvement in decision making among ED chest pain patients., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial of a shared decision-making intervention in ED patients with low-risk chest pain. We evaluated the degree to which patients were involved in decision making using the OPTION-12 (observing patient involvement) scale and patients' reported desire for involvement in decision making using the Control Preferences Scale (CPS). We measured the associations of patient factors with OPTION-12 and CPS scores using multivariable regression., Results: Of the 898 patients enrolled, mean (±SD) age was 51.5 (±11.4) years and 59% were female. Multivariable analysis revealed that only two factors were significantly associated with OPTION-12 scores: study site and use of the decision aid. OPTION-12 scores were 10.3 (standard error = 0.6) points higher for patients randomized to the decision aid compared to usual care (p < 0.001). Higher health literacy was associated with lower scores on the CPS, indicating greater desire for involvement (odds ratio = 0.91, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Patients' reported desire for involvement in decision making was higher among those with higher health literacy. After study site and other potential confounding factors were adjusted for, only use of the decision aid was associated with observed patient involvement in decision making. As the science and practice of shared decision making in the ED moves toward implementation, high-fidelity integration of the decision aid into the flow of care will be necessary to realize desired outcomes., (© 2018 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: As shared decision making (SDM) has received increased attention as a method to improve the patient-centeredness of emergency department (ED) care, we sought to determine patients' desired level of involvement in medical decisions and their perceptions of potential barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED., Methods: We surveyed a cross-sectional sample of adult ED patients at three academic medical centers across the United States. The survey included 32 items regarding patient involvement in medical decisions including a modified Control Preference Scale and questions about barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED. Items were developed and refined based on prior literature and qualitative interviews with ED patients. Research assistants administered the survey in person., Results: Of 797 patients approached, 661 (83%) agreed to participate. Participants were 52% female, 45% white, and 30% Hispanic. The majority of respondents (85%-92%, depending on decision type) expressed a desire for some degree of involvement in decision making in the ED, while 8% to 15% preferred to leave decision making to their physician alone. Ninety-eight percent wanted to be involved with decisions when "something serious is going on." The majority of patients (94%) indicated that self-efficacy was not a barrier to SDM in the ED. However, most patients (55%) reported a tendency to defer to the physician's decision making during an ED visit, with about half reporting they would wait for a physician to ask them to be involved., Conclusion: We found that the majority of ED patients in our large, diverse sample wanted to be involved in medical decisions, especially in the case of a "serious" medical problem, and felt that they had the ability to do so. Nevertheless, many patients were unlikely to actively seek involvement and defaulted to allowing the physician to make decisions during the ED visit. After fully explaining the consequences of a decision, clinicians should make an effort to explicitly ascertain patients' desired level of involvement in decision making., (© 2018 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: The objective was to develop a patient decision aid (DA) to promote shared decision making (SDM) for stable, alert patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with syncope., Methods: Using input from patients, clinicians, and experts in the field of syncope, health care design, and SDM, we created a prototype of a paper-based DA to engage patients in the disposition decision (admission vs. discharge) after an unremarkable ED evaluation for syncope. In phase 1, we conducted one-on-one semistructured exploratory interviews with 10 emergency physicians and 10 ED syncope patients. In phase 2, we conducted one-on-one directed interviews with 15 emergency care clinicians, five cardiologists, and 12 ED syncope patients to get detailed feedback on DA content and design. We iteratively modified the aid using feedback from each interviewee until clarity and usability had been optimized., Results: The 11 × 17-inch, paper-based DA, titled SynDA, includes four sections: 1) explanation of syncope, 2) explanation of future risks, 3) personalized 30-day risk estimate, and 4) disposition options. The personalized risk estimate is calculated using a recently published syncope risk-stratification tool. This risk estimate is stated in natural frequency and graphically displayed using a 100-person color-coded pictogram. Patient-oriented questions are included to stimulate dialogue between patient and clinician. At the end of the development process, patient and physician participants expressed satisfaction with the clarity and usability of the DA., Conclusions: We iteratively developed an evidence-based DA to facilitate SDM for alert syncope patients after an unremarkable ED evaluation. Further testing is required to determine its effects on patient care. This DA has the potential to improve care for syncope patients and promote patient-centered care in emergency medicine., (© 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objective: We assessed emergency department (ED) patient perceptions of how physicians can improve their language to determine patient preferences for 11 phrases to enhance physician empathy toward the goal of reducing low-value advanced imaging., Methods: Multi-center survey study of low-risk ED patients undergoing computerized tomography (CT) scanning., Results: We enroled 305 participants across nine sites. The statement "I have carefully considered what you told me about what brought you here today" was most frequently rated as important (88%). The statement "I have thought about the cost of your medical care to you today" was least frequently rated as important (59%). Participants preferred statements indicating physicians had considered their "vital signs and physical examination" (86%), "past medical history" (84%), and "what prior research tells me about your condition" (79%). Participants also valued statements conveying risks of testing, including potential kidney injury (78%) and radiation (77%)., Conclusion: The majority of phrases were identified as important. Participants preferred statements conveying cognitive reassurance, medical knowledge and risks of testing., Practice Implications: Our findings suggest specific phrases have the potential to enhance ED patient perceptions of physician empathy. Further research is needed to determine whether statements to convey empathy affect diagnostic testing rates., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Shared decision-making is playing an increasingly large role in emergency cardiovascular care. Although there are many challenges to successfully performing shared decision-making in the emergency department, there are numerous clinical scenarios in which it should be used. In this article, we explore new research and emerging decision aids in the following emergency care scenarios: (1) low-risk chest pain; (2) new-onset atrial fibrillation; and (3) moderate-risk syncope. These decision aids are designed to engage patients and facilitate shared decision-making for specific treatment and disposition (admit vs discharge) decisions. We then offer a 3-step, practical approach to performing shared decision-making in the acute care setting, on the basis of broad stakeholder input and previous conceptual work. Step 1 involves simply acknowledging that a clinical decision needs to be made. Step 2 involves a shared discussion about the working diagnosis and the options for care in the context of the patient's values, preferences, and circumstances. The third and final step requires the patient and provider to agree on a plan of action regarding further medical care. The implementation of shared decision-making in emergency cardiology has the potential to shift the paradigm of clinical practice from paternalism toward mutualism and improve the quality and experience of care for our patients., (Copyright © 2017 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Shared decisionmaking has been proposed as a method to promote active engagement of patients in emergency care decisions. Despite the recent attention shared decisionmaking has received in the emergency medicine community, including being the topic of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, misconceptions remain in regard to the precise meaning of the term, the process, and the conditions under which it is most likely to be valuable. With the help of a patient representative and an interaction designer, we developed a simple framework to illustrate how shared decisionmaking should be approached in clinical practice. We believe it should be the preferred or default approach to decisionmaking, except in clinical situations in which 3 factors interfere. These 3 factors are lack of clinical uncertainty or equipoise, patient decisionmaking ability, and time, all of which can render shared decisionmaking infeasible. Clinical equipoise refers to scenarios in which there are 2 or more medically reasonable management options. Patient decisionmaking ability refers to a patient's capacity and willingness to participate in his or her emergency care decisions. Time refers to the acuity of the clinical situation (which may require immediate action) and the time that the clinician has to devote to the shared decisionmaking conversation. In scenarios in which there is only one medically reasonable management option, informed consent is indicated, with compassionate persuasion used as appropriate. If time or patient capacity is lacking, physician-directed decisionmaking will occur. With this framework as the foundation, we discuss the process of shared decisionmaking and how it can be used in practice. Finally, we highlight 5 common misconceptions in regard to shared decisionmaking in the ED. With an improved understanding of shared decisionmaking, this approach should be used to facilitate the provision of high-quality, patient-centered emergency care., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: In 2013, the American College of Emergency Physicians joined the Choosing Wisely campaign; however, its impact on emergency physician behavior is unknown. We assessed knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behaviors regarding the Choosing Wisely recommendations., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional survey of emergency physicians at a national meeting. We approached 819 physicians; 765 (93.4%) completed the survey., Results: As a result of the Choosing Wisely campaign, most respondents (64.5%) felt more comfortable discussing low-value services with patients, 54.5% reported reducing utilization, and 52.5% were aware of local efforts to promote the campaign. A majority (62.97%) of respondents were able to identify at least four of five recommendations. The most prevalent low-value practices were computed tomography (CT) brain for minor head injury (29.9%) and antibiotics for acute sinusitis (26.9%). Few respondents reported performing lumbar radiograph for nontraumatic low back pain (7.8%) and Foley catheter for patients who can void (5.6%). Respondents reported patient/family expectations as the most important reason for ordering antibiotics for sinusitis (68%) and imaging for low back pain (56.8%). However, concern for serious diagnosis was the most important reason for performing CT chest for patients with normal D-dimer (49.7%) and CT abdomen for recurrent uncomplicated renal colic (42.5%). A minority (3.8% to 26.7%) of respondents identified malpractice risk as the primary reason for performing low-value services., Conclusions: Despite familiarity with Choosing Wisely, many emergency physicians report performing low-value services. Primary reasons for low-value services differ: antibiotic prescribing was driven by patient/family expectations, while concern for serious diagnosis influenced advanced diagnostic imaging. Greater efforts are needed to promote effective dissemination and implementation; such efforts may be targeted based on differing reasons for low-value services., (© 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Introduction: We sought to compare three hospital cost-estimation models for patients undergoing evaluation for unexplained syncope using hospital cost data. Developing such a model would allow researchers to assess the value of novel clinical algorithms for syncope management., Methods: We collected complete health services data, including disposition, testing, and length of stay (LOS), on 67 adult patients (age 60 years and older) who presented to the emergency department (ED) with syncope at a single hospital. Patients were excluded if a serious medical condition was identified. We created three hospital cost-estimation models to estimate facility costs: V1, unadjusted Medicare payments for observation and/or hospital admission; V2: modified Medicare payment, prorated by LOS in calendar days; and V3: modified Medicare payment, prorated by LOS in hours. Total hospital costs included unadjusted Medicare payments for diagnostic testing and estimated facility costs. We plotted these estimates against actual cost data from the hospital finance department, and performed correlation and regression analyses., Results: Of the three models, V3 consistently outperformed the others with regard to correlation and goodness of fit. The Pearson correlation coefficient for V3 was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81, 0.92) with an R-square value of 0.77 and a linear regression coefficient of 0.87 (95% CI 0.76, 0.99)., Conclusion: Using basic health services data, it is possible to accurately estimate hospital costs for older adults undergoing a hospital-based evaluation for unexplained syncope. This methodology could help assess the potential economic impact of implementing novel clinical algorithms for ED syncope., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: By the WestJEM article submission agreement, all authors are required to disclose all affiliations, funding sources and financial or management relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias. This project was supported by a grant from the NIH/NHLBI: R01 HL111033. Marc A. Probst is supported by a grant from the NIH/NHLBI: 1K23HL132052-01. Michelle P. Lin is supported by a grant from the Emergency Medicine Foundation.

Decision aids are evidenced-based tools designed to increase patient understanding of medical options and possible outcomes, facilitate conversation between patients and clinicians, and improve patient engagement. Decision aids have been used for shared decision making (SDM) interventions outside of the ED setting for more than a decade. Their use in the ED has only recently begun to be studied. This article provides background on this topic and the conclusions of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference SDM in practice work group regarding "Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant, Patient-Centered Research Agenda." The goal was to determine a prioritized research agenda for the development and testing of SDM interventions for use in emergency care that was most important to patients, clinicians, caregivers, and other key stakeholders. Using the nominal group technique, the consensus working group proposed prioritized research questions in six key domains: 1) content (i.e., clinical scenario or decision area), 2) level of evidence available, 3) tool design strategies, 4) risk communication, 5) stakeholders, and 6) outcomes., Competing Interests: None, (© 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Pediatric patients with suspected cervical spine injuries (CSI) often receive a computed tomography (CT) scan as an initial diagnostic imaging test. While sensitive, CT of the cervical spine carries significant radiation and risk of lethal malignant transformation later in life. Plain radiographs carry significantly less radiation and could serve as the preferred screening tool, provided they have a high functional sensitivity in detecting pediatric patients with CSI. We hypothesize that plain cervical spine radiographs can reliably detect pediatric patients with CSI and seek to quantify the functional sensitivity of plain radiography as compared to CT. We analyzed data from the NEXUS cervical spine study to assess the sensitivity of plain radiographs in the evaluation of CSI. We identified all pediatric patients who underwent plain radiographic imaging, and all pediatric patients found to have CSI. We then determined the sensitivity of plain radiographs in detecting pediatric patients with CSI. We identified 44 pediatric patients with CSI in the dataset with age ranging from 2 to 18 years old. Thirty-two of the 44 pediatric patients received cervical spine plain films as a part of their workup. Plain films were able to identify all 32 pediatric patients with CSI to yield a sensitivity of 100 % in detecting injury victims (95 % confidence interval 89.1-100.0 %). Plain radiography was highly sensitive for the identification of CSI in our cohort of pediatric patients and is useful as a screening tool in the evaluation of pediatric CSI.

Between 1997 and 2011, there was a nearly 50 percent reduction in US emergency department mortality rates for adults. This trend likely has many causes, related to advances in palliative, prehospital, and emergency care., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Objectives: The objective was to describe perceptions of practicing emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the appropriateness and medicolegal implications of using shared decision-making (SDM) in the emergency department (ED)., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EPs at a large, national professional meeting to assess perceived appropriateness of SDM for different categories of ED management (e.g., diagnostic testing, treatment, disposition) and in common clinical scenarios (e.g., low-risk chest pain, syncope, minor head injury). A 21-item survey instrument was iteratively developed through review by content experts, cognitive testing, and pilot testing. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted., Results: We approached 737 EPs; 709 (96%) completed the survey. Two-thirds (67.8%) of respondents were male; 51% practiced in an academic setting and 44% in the community. Of the seven management decision categories presented, SDM was reported to be most frequently appropriate for deciding on invasive procedures (71.5%), computed tomography (CT) scanning (56.7%), and post-ED disposition (56.3%). Among the specific clinical scenarios, use of thrombolytics for acute ischemic stroke was felt to be most frequently appropriate for SDM (83.4%), followed by lumbar puncture to rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage (73.8%) and CT head for pediatric minor head injury (69.9%). Most EPs (66.8%) felt that using and documenting SDM would decrease their medicolegal risk while a minority (14.2%) felt that it would increase their risk., Conclusions: Acceptance of SDM among EPs appears to be strong across management categories (diagnostic testing, treatment, and disposition) and in a variety of clinical scenarios. SDM is perceived by most EPs to be medicolegally protective., Competing Interests: There are no other conflicts of interest., (© 2016 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Researchers have attempted to optimize imaging utilization by describing which clinical variables are more predictive of acute disease and, conversely, what combination of variables can obviate the need for imaging. These results are then used to develop evidence-based clinical pathways, clinical decision instruments, and clinical practice guidelines. Despite the validation of these results in subsequent studies, with some demonstrating improved outcomes, their actual use is often limited. This article outlines a research agenda to promote the dissemination and implementation (also known as knowledge translation) of evidence-based interventions for emergency department (ED) imaging, i.e., clinical pathways, clinical decision instruments, and clinical practice guidelines. We convened a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders and held online and telephone discussions over a 6-month period culminating in an in-person meeting at the 2015 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference. We identified the following four overarching research questions: 1) what determinants (barriers and facilitators) influence emergency physicians' use of evidence-based interventions when ordering imaging in the ED; 2) what implementation strategies at the institutional level can improve the use of evidence-based interventions for ED imaging; 3) what interventions at the health care policy level can facilitate the adoption of evidence-based interventions for ED imaging; and 4) how can health information technology, including electronic health records, clinical decision support, and health information exchanges, be used to increase awareness, use, and adherence to evidence-based interventions for ED imaging? Advancing research that addresses these questions will provide valuable information as to how we can use evidence-based interventions to optimize imaging utilization and ultimately improve patient care., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: Syncope is a frequent emergency department (ED) presenting complaint and results in a disproportionate rate of hospitalization with variable management strategies. The objective was to estimate the annual national cost savings, reduction in inpatient hospitalizations, and reduction in hospital bed hours from implementation of protocolized care in an observation unit., Methods: We created a Monte Carlo simulation by building a model that reflects current clinical practice in the United States and uses inputs gathered from the most recent available peer-reviewed literature and national survey data. ED visit volume was adjusted to reflect observation unit availability and the portion of observation visits requiring subsequent inpatient care. A recent multicenter randomized controlled study informed the cost savings and length of stay reduction per observation unit visit model inputs. The study population included patients aged 50 years and older with syncope deemed at intermediate risk for serious 30-day cardiovascular outcomes., Results: The mean (±SD) annual cost savings was estimated to be $108 million (±$89 million) from avoiding 235,000 (±13,900) inpatient admissions, resulting in 4,297,000 (±1,242,000) fewer hospital bed hours., Conclusions: The potential national cost savings for managing selected patients with syncope in a dedicated observation unit is substantial. Syncope is one of many conditions suitable for care in an observation unit as an alternative to an inpatient setting. As pressure to decrease hospital length of stay and bill short-stay hospitalizations as observation increases, syncope illustrates the value of observation unit care., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Background: Over the last 20 years, numerous research articles and clinical guidelines aimed at optimizing resource utilization for emergency department (ED) patients presenting with syncope have been published., Hypothesis: We hypothesized that there would be temporal trends in syncope-related ED visits and associated trends in imaging, hospital admissions, and diagnostic frequencies., Methods: The ED component of National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was analyzed from 2001 through 2010, comprising more than 358000 visits (representing an estimated 1.18 billion visits nationally). We selected ED visits with a reason for visit of syncope or fainting and calculated nationally representative weighted estimates for prevalence of such visits and associated rates of advanced imaging utilization and admission. For admitted patients from 2005 to 2010, the most frequent hospital discharge diagnoses were tabulated., Results: During the study period, there were more than 3500 actual ED visits (representing 11.9 million visits nationally) related to syncope, representing roughly 1% of all ED visits. Admission rates for syncope patients ranged from 27% to 35% and showed no significant downward trend (P = .1). Advanced imaging rates increased from about 21% to 45% and showed a significant upward trend (P < .001). For admitted patients, the most common hospital discharge diagnosis was the symptomatic diagnosis of "syncope and collapse" (36.4%)., Conclusions: Despite substantial efforts by medical researchers and professional societies, resource utilization associated with ED visits for syncope appears to have actually increased. There have been no apparent improvements in diagnostic yield for admissions. Novel strategies may be needed to change practice patterns for such patients., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The objective was to determine emergency physician (EP) perceptions regarding 1) the extent to which they order medically unnecessary advanced diagnostic imaging, 2) factors that contribute to this behavior, and 3) proposed solutions for curbing this practice., Methods: As part of a larger study to engage physicians in the delivery of high-value health care, two multispecialty focus groups were conducted to explore the topic of decision-making around resource utilization, after which qualitative analysis was used to generate survey questions. The survey was extensively pilot-tested and refined for emergency medicine (EM) to focus on advanced diagnostic imaging (i.e., computed tomography [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). The survey was then administered to a national, purposive sample of EPs and EM trainees. Simple descriptive statistics to summarize physician responses are presented., Results: In this study, 478 EPs were approached, of whom 435 (91%) completed the survey; 68% of respondents were board-certified, and roughly half worked in academic emergency departments (EDs). Over 85% of respondents believe too many diagnostic tests are ordered in their own EDs, and 97% said at least some (mean = 22%) of the advanced imaging studies they personally order are medically unnecessary. The main perceived contributors were fear of missing a low-probability diagnosis and fear of litigation. Solutions most commonly felt to be "extremely" or "very" helpful for reducing unnecessary imaging included malpractice reform (79%), increased patient involvement through education (70%) and shared decision-making (56%), feedback to physicians on test-ordering metrics (55%), and improved education of physicians on diagnostic testing (50%)., Conclusions: Overordering of advanced imaging may be a systemic problem, as many EPs believe a substantial proportion of such studies, including some they personally order, are medically unnecessary. Respondents cited multiple complex factors with several potential high-yield solutions that must be addressed simultaneously to curb overimaging., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objectives: Despite the potential benefits of shared decision-making (SDM), its integration into emergency care is challenging. Emergency physician (EP) perceptions about the frequency with which they use SDM, its potential to reduce medically unnecessary diagnostic testing, and the barriers to employing SDM in the emergency department (ED) were investigated., Methods: As part of a larger project examining beliefs on overtesting, questions were posed to EPs about SDM. Qualitative analysis of two multispecialty focus groups was done exploring decision-making around resource use to generate survey items. The survey was then pilot-tested and revised to focus on advanced diagnostic imaging and SDM. The final survey was administered to EPs recruited at four emergency medicine (EM) conferences and 15 ED group meetings. This report addresses responses regarding SDM., Results: A purposive sample of 478 EPs from 29 states were approached, of whom 435 (91%) completed the survey. EPs estimated that, on average, multiple reasonable management options exist in over 50% of their patients and reported employing SDM with 58% of such patients. Respondents perceived SDM as a promising solution to reduce overtesting. However, despite existing research to the contrary, respondents also commonly cited beliefs that 1) "many patients prefer that the physician decides," 2) "when offered a choice, many patients opt for more aggressive care than they need," and 3) "it is too complicated for patients to know how to choose.", Conclusions: Most surveyed EPs believe SDM is a potential high-yield solution to overtesting, but many perceive patient-related barriers to its successful implementation., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Objective: There has been a rise in advanced diagnostic imaging (ADI) use in the emergency department (ED). Increased utilization may contribute to longer length of stay (LOS), but prior reports have not considered improved methods for modeling skewed LOS data., Methods: The 2010 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data were analyzed by 5 common ED chief complaints. Generalized linear model (GLM) was compared to quantile and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to evaluate the association between ADI and ED LOS. Receipt of computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was the primary exposure. Emergency department LOS was the primary outcome., Results: Of the 33,685 ED visits analyzed, 17% involved ADI. The median LOS for patients without ADI was 138 minutes compared to 252 minutes for those who received ADI. Overall, GLM offered the most unbiased estimates, although it provided similar adjusted point estimates to OLS for the marginal change in LOS associated with ADI. The effect of imaging differed by LOS quantile, especially for patients with abdominal pain, fever, and back symptoms., Conclusions: Generalized linear model offered an improved modeling approach compared to OLS and quantile regression. Consideration of such techniques may facilitate a more complete view of the effect of ADI on ED LOS., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The use of computed tomographic scanning in blunt head trauma has increased dramatically in recent years without an accompanying rise in the prevalence of injury or hospital admission for serious conditions. Because computed tomography is neither harmless nor inexpensive, researchers have attempted to optimize utilization, largely through research that describes which clinical variables predict intracranial injury, and use this information to develop clinical decision instruments. Although such techniques may be useful when the benefits and harms of each strategy (neuroimaging vs observation) are quantifiable and amenable to comparison, the exact magnitude of these benefits and harms remains unknown in this clinical scenario. We believe that most clinical decision instrument development efforts are misguided insofar as they ignore critical, nonclinical factors influencing the decision to image. In this article, we propose a conceptual model to illustrate how clinical and nonclinical factors influence emergency physicians making this decision. We posit that elements unrelated to standard clinical factors, such as personality of the physician, fear of litigation and of missed diagnoses, patient expectations, and compensation method, may have equal or greater impact on actual decision making than traditional clinical factors. We believe that 3 particular factors deserve special consideration for further research: fear of error/malpractice, financial incentives, and patient engagement. Acknowledgement and study of these factors will be essential if we are to understand how emergency physicians truly make these decisions and how test-ordering behavior can be modified., Competing Interests: There are no other conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)