Search

Objectives Assess the impact of an electronic health record (EHR)‐embedded clinical pathway (ePATH) as compared to a paper‐based clinical decision support tool on outcomes for patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods A retrospective, quasi‐experimental study using difference‐in‐differences and interrupted time series specifications to evaluate the impact of an EHR‐embedded clinical pathway between April 2013 and July 2017. The intervention was implemented in February 2016 at a large academic tertiary hospital and compared to a local community hospital without the intervention. Eligible patients included adults (>18 years) presenting to the ED with chest pain who had a troponin ordered within 2 hours of arrival and a chest pain‐related diagnosis. Patients with initial evidence of acute myocardial infarction were excluded. Primary outcomes included rates of admission and stress testing, hospital length of stay, and occurrence of major adverse cardiac events. Results On average, there were 170 chest pain visits per month at the intervention site. The frequency of hospital admission (unadjusted 28.2% to 20.9%, P

Objective Accurate triage in the emergency department (ED) is critical for medical safety and operational efficiency. We aimed to predict the number of future required ED resources, as defined by the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage protocol, using natural language processing of nursing triage notes. Methods We constructed a retrospective cohort of all 265,572 consecutive ED encounters from 2015 to 2016 from 3 separate clinically heterogeneous academically affiliated EDs. We excluded encounters missing relevant information, leaving 226,317 encounters. We calculated the number of resources used by patients in the ED retrospectively and based outcome categories on criteria defined in the ESI algorithm: 0 (30,604 encounters), 1 (49,315 encounters), and 2 or more (146,398 encounters). A neural network model was trained on a training subset to predict the number of resources using triage notes and clinical variables at triage. Model performance was evaluated using the test subset and was compared with human ratings. Results Overall model accuracy and macro F1 score for number of resources were 66.5% and 0.601, respectively. The model had similar macro F1 (0.589 vs 0.592) and overall accuracy (65.9% vs 69.0%) compared to human raters. Model predictions had slightly higher F1 scores and accuracy for 0 resources and were less accurate for 2 or more resources. Conclusions Machine learning of nursing triage notes, combined with clinical data available at ED presentation, can be used to predict the number of required future ED resources. These findings suggest that machine learning may be a valuable adjunct tool in the initial triage of ED patients.

Objective We sought to examine the impact of limiting the number of open active charts on wrong patient order entry events among 13 emergency departments (EDs) in a large integrated health system. Methods A retrospective chart review of all orders placed between September 2017 and September 2019 was conducted. The rate of retract and reorder events was analyzed with no overlap in both the period pre‐ and post‐intervention period. Secondary analysis of error rate by clinician type, clinician patient load, and time of day was performed. Results The order retraction rate was not improved pre‐ and post‐intervention. Retraction rates varied by clinician type with residents retracting more often than physicians (odds ratio [OR] = 1.443 [1.349, 1.545]). Advanced practice providers also showed a slightly higher rate than physicians (OR = 1.114 [1.071, 1.160]). Pharmacists showed very low rates compared to physicians (OR = 0.191 [0.048, 0.764]). Time of day and staffing ratios appear to be a factor with wrong patient order entry rates slightly lower during the night (1900–0700) than the day (OR 0.958 [0.923, 0.995]), and increasing slightly with every additional patient per provider (OR 1.019 [1.005, 1.032]). The Academic Medical Center had more retractions that the other EDs. OR for the various ED types compared to the Academic Medical Center included Community (OR 0.908 [0.859, 0.959]), Teaching Hospitals (OR 0.850 [0.802, 0.900]), and Freestanding (OR 0.932 [0.864, 1.006]). Conclusions Limiting the number of open active charts from 4 to 2 did not significantly reduce the incidence of wrong patient order entry. Further investigation into other factors contributing to order entry errors is warranted.

Objective Prior to 2011, emergency physicians who completed critical care (CC) fellowship were unable to obtain board certification in the United States. Three pathways for CC board certification have since been established. This study explores the training, practice, and perceived challenges of emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians in the United States. Methods Anonymous institutional review board‐approved survey distributed via email through an online survey engine from April to December 2016. Participants were recruited through national organizations and independent interest groups. Emergency physicians who were in CC fellowship or had completed a CC fellowship and were in practice in the United States participated voluntarily. Results Of the 162 respondents, 152 were included (92 physicians, 60 fellows). Eighty‐nine percent ranged from 31–50 years old. Among fellows, 90% desired a dual discipline practice. Among physicians, 63% split their time between the emergency department and ICU. Seventy‐one percent of physicians reported working in academic institutions. Among physicians engaged in a dual practice, mean full‐time equivalent (±SD) devoted to the ED was 0.37 (±0.22), mean full‐time equivalent for ICU was 0.47 (±0.22), and mean full‐time equivalent for protected academic time was 0.28 (±0.19). Emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians identified numerous challenges associated with duality. Conclusions Since the advent of critical care board certification for emergency physicians in the United States, there has been an increasing number of emergency physicians pursuing CC fellowships and achieving CC board certification. Emergency medicine/critical care physicians are venturing into a variety of practice models, demonstrating that the employment landscape remains plastic. Not unexpectedly, emergency medicine/critical care fellows and emergency medicine/critical care physicians are encountering challenges intrinsic to their duality.

Objectives Difficult intravenous access (DIVA) is common in the emergency department (ED). We investigated the extent to which DIVA is associated with care delay outcomes including time to first laboratory draw, therapies, imaging, and ED disposition. Methods An observational retrospective cohort analysis of patients with DIVA treated between 2018 and 2020 at 2 urban academic EDs was performed. DIVA was defined as patients requiring ultrasound‐guided intravenous access placed by physicians or advanced practice providers (APPs) as opposed to landmark‐based intravenous placement by nurses. ED throughput variables and disposition time were compared. We correlated DIVA with time to administration of intravenous pain medications, fluids, imaging contrast, laboratory results, and ED disposition. Results A total of 108,256 subjects with 161,122 total encounters were included. DIVA occurred in 4961 (3.1%) of ED visits. Patients with DIVA were more likely to be female (3.5% vs 2.6% for males, odds ratio [OR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27–1.42), self‐identify as black (OR 1.78, 95% CI: 1.66–1.91), and have higher acuity of illness (P < 0.001). Among pediatric patients, DIVA occurred most often in the first year of life at a rate of 3.25%. In adults, DIVA occurred in 2 age peaks; at 35 years (4.02%), and at 63 years (3.44%). In all workflow metrics, the presence of DIVA was associated with significant delays in median time to completion: 50 minutes for pain medication administration, 36 minutes for intravenous fluid administration, 29 minutes for laboratory results, 57 minutes for intravenous contrast administration, and 87 minutes for discharge orders. Conclusion DIVA was associated with increased time to therapies, diagnostic studies, imaging completion, and ED disposition. A more expeditious approach to achieving intravenous access in patients with predicted DIVA could improve ED throughput and patient care overall.

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, one of the major changes that has occurred in emergency medicine is the evolution of telemedicine. With relaxation of regulatory and administrative barriers, the use of this already available technology has rapidly expanded. Telemedicine provides opportunity to markedly decrease personal protective equipment (PPE) and reduce healthcare worker exposures. Moreover, with the convenience and availability of access to medical care via telemedicine, a more fundamental change in healthcare delivery in the United States is likely. The implementation of telemedicine in the emergency department (ED) in particular has great potential to prevent the iatrogenic spread of COVID‐19 and protect health care workers. Challenges to widespread adoption of telemedicine include privacy concerns, limitation of physical examination, and concerns of patient experience. In this clinical review, we discuss ED telemedicine applications, logistics, and challenges in the COVID‐19 era as well as recent regulatory and legal changes. In addition, examples of telemedicine use are described from 2 institutions. Examples of future applications of telemedicine within the realm of emergency medicine are also discussed.

Emergency physicians face real‐time ethical dilemmas that may occur at any hour of the day or night. Hospital ethics committees and ethics consultation services are not always able to provide immediate responses to emergency physicians’ consultation requests. When faced with an emergent dilemma, emergency physicians sometimes rely on risk management or hospital counsel to answer legal questions, but may be better served by real‐time ethics consultation. When other resources are not immediately available, emergency physicians should feel confident in making timely decisions, guided by basic principles of medical ethics. We make the following recommendations: (1) availability of a member of the hospital ethics committee to provide in‐person or telephonic consultation concurrent with patient care; (2) appointment to the hospital ethics committee of an emergency physician who is familiar with bioethical principles and is available for consultation when other ethics consultants are not; and (3) development of educational tools by professional societies or similar organizations to assist emergency physicians in making reasoned and defensible clinical ethics decisions.

Study hypothesis Emergency department (ED) holding orders are used in an effort to streamline patient flow. Little research exists on the safety of this practice. Here, we report on prevalence and risk factors for upgrade of medical admissions to ICU for whom holding orders were written. Methods Retrospective review of holding order admissions through our ED for years 2013‐2018. Pregnancy, prisoner, pediatric, surgical, and ICU admissions were excluded, as were transfers from other hospitals. Risk factors of interest included vital signs, physiologic data, laboratory markers, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), Quick SOFA (qSOFA), modified early warning (MEWS) scores, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Primary outcome was ICU transfer within 24 hours of admission. Analysis was completed using multivariable logistic regression. Results Between 2013 and 2018, the ED had 203,374 visits. Approximately 20% (N = 54,915) were admitted, 23% of whom had holding orders (N = 12,680). A minority of those with a holding order were transferred to the ICU within 24 hours (N = 79; 0.62%). Those transferred to ICU had increased heart and respiratory rate, P/F ratio, and increased oxygen need. They also had higher MEWS, quick SOFA (qSOFA), and SOFA scores. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated a significant association between ICU admission and FiO2 (odds ratio [OR] 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25‐1.74), MEWS (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.14‐1.52), SOFA Score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.05‐1.35), and gastrointestinal (OR 3.25; 95% CI: 1.50‐7.03) or other combined diagnosis (OR 2.19; CI: 1.07‐4.48) (P = 0.0017). Conclusion Holding orders are used for >20% of all admissions and

Objective In response to concerns about patient care and safety, our urban, tertiary care, Level 1 trauma center adult emergency department (ED) created an advanced practice provider‐staffed critical care step‐down unit (CCSU). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the CCSU's impact on patient care, safety, and ED operations. Methods We compared ED length of stay, return visits to the ED within 72 hours, billing code assignments (current procedural terminology evaluation and management [CPT E&M] codes), and quality of electronic health record documentation per QNOTE for the 2 years after the CCSU was initiated (CCSU period) versus before its initiation (pre‐CCSU period). Results There were 31,418 critical care ED patient visits in the pre‐CCSU period and 33,396 in the CCSU period. Median ED length of stay did not change overall between the CCSU versus pre‐CCSU period (∆1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = −2.4, 4.4] minutes), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆‐4 [95% CI = −7.8, −0.2] minutes). 72‐hour return ED visits also did not change overall (∆0% [95% CI = −0.1, 0]), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆0.4% [95% CI = −0.05, −0.4]). CPT E&M billing increased for highest‐level visits (99,291: ∆1.3% [95% CI= 0.5, 2.0]). Quality of electronic health record documentation as measured by QNOTE also improved (∆11.5% [95% CI = 4.9, 18.1]). Conclusion This ED's CCSU performance metrics indicate at least moderate improvement in ED length of stay, 72‐hour return visits, critical care patient billing, and electronic health record documentation. EDs elsewhere can consider implementation of this advanced practice provider‐staffed solution to improvement in critical care in ED.

Objective We sought to evaluate the influence of several well‐documented, readily available risk factors that may influence a psychiatric consultant's decision to admit an emergency department (ED) patient reporting suicidal ideation for psychiatric hospitalization. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of adult patients presenting to six affiliated EDs within Pennsylvania from January 2015 to June 2017. We identified 533 patients reporting current active suicidal ideation and receiving a complete psychiatric consultation. Socio‐demographic characteristics, psychiatric presentation and history, and disposition were collected. Decision tree analysis was conducted with disposition as the outcome. Results Four of 27 variables emerged as most influential to decisionmaking, including psychiatric consultant determination of current suicide risk, patient age, current depressive disorder diagnosis, and patient history of physical violence. Likelihood of admission versus discharge ranged from 97% to 58%, depending on the variables considered. Post hoc analysis indicated that current suicide plan, access to means, lack of social support, and suicide attempt history were significantly associated with psychiatric consultant determination of moderate‐to‐high suicide risk, with small‐to‐medium effect sizes emerging. Conclusions Only a handful of variables drive disposition decisions for ED patients reporting current active suicidal ideation, with both high and low fidelity decisions made. Patient suicide risk, determined by considering empirically supported risk factors for suicide attempt and death, contributes the greatest influence on a psychiatric consultant's decision to admit. In line with American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) recommendations, this study accentuates the importance of using clinical judgment and adjunct measures to determine patient disposition within this population.

Hip dislocation is a common complication after total hip arthroplasty surgery. Newer prosthetic implants aim to reduce the risk of dislocation. The new dual mobility implant has a unique design that may result in intra‐prosthetic dislocation. We report a case of a recurrently missed iatrogenic intra‐prosthetic dislocation following closed reduction efforts in the emergency department (ED). Emergency physicians must be aware of the design, pitfalls, and management of this new prosthetic hip design.

Background Patient boarding in the emergency department (ED) is a significant issue leading to increased morbidity/mortality, longer lengths of stay, and higher hospital costs. We examined the impact of boarding patients on the ED waiting room. Additionally, we determined whether facility type, patient acuity, time of day, or hospital occupancy impacted waiting rooms in 18 EDs across a large healthcare system. Methods This was a retrospective multicenter study that included all ED encounters between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019. Encounters with missing Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level were excluded. ESI levels were defined as high (ESI 1,2), middle (ESI 3), and low (ESI 4,5). Spearman correlation coefficients measured the relationship between boarded patients and number of patients in ED waiting room. A multivariable mixed effects model identified drivers of this relationship. Results A total of 1,134,178 encounters were included. Spearman correlation coefficient was significant between number of patients in the ED waiting room and patient boarding (0.54). For every additional patient boarded/hour, the number of patients waiting/hour in the waiting room increased by 8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08–1.09). The number of patients waiting for a room/hour was 2.28 times higher for middle than for high acuity. The number of patients in waiting room slightly decreased as hospital occupancy increased (95% CI = 0.997–0.997). Conclusion Number of patients in ED waiting room are directly related to boarding times and hospital occupancy. ED waiting room times should be considered as not just an ED operational issue, but an aspect of hospital throughput.

Background Assess current and future pediatric emergency physician supply and need at 26 pediatric emergency departments (EDs) in 10 administrative regions across Saudi Arabia from 2021 through 2030. Methods For 10 administrative regions across Saudi Arabia, data were obtained on the size of the pediatric population (children

Objective Physician assistant (PA) and nurse practitioner (NP) staffing is increasingly common in emergency departments (EDs), with variable physician supervision. We examined the feasibility of using publicly reported metrics as a measure of ED performance by staffing model. Methods We classified a convenience sample of 915 EDs by staffing model using the National Emergency Department Inventory‐USA 2016 and a follow‐up survey. Staffing models included 24/7 attending coverage with PAs/NPs, 24/7 attending coverage without PAs/NPs, and PAs/NPs without 24/7 attending coverage. We linked EDs with Hospital Compare data to examine availability of metrics and compared metric performance by staffing model. We used regression modeling to examine the independent relationship between staffing model and ED performance after adjusting for ED characteristics. Results Of 915 EDs surveyed, 767 (83%) responded and 436 (48%) had complete staffing data and any Hospital Compare data. The 216 EDs without any Hospital Compare data more frequently had no 24/7 attending coverage, were smaller, and were more often rural. Of 5 clinical metrics, 3 had data from

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.

Equity in the promotion of women and underrepresented minorities (URiM) is essential for the advancement of academic emergency medicine and the specialty as a whole. Forward‐thinking healthcare organizations can best position themselves to optimally care for an increasingly diverse patient population and mentor trainees by championing increased diversity in senior faculty ranks, leadership, and governance roles. This article explores several potential solutions to addressing inequities that hinder the advancement of women and URiM faculty. It is intended to complement the recently approved American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) policy statement aimed at overcoming barriers to promotion of women and URiM faculty in academic emergency medicine. This policy statement was jointly released and supported by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM), and the Association of Academic Chairs of Emergency Medicine (AACEM).

Introduction Human sex trafficking is a global public health crisis. Emergency departments (EDs) are important access points for trafficked persons who seek medical care. However, because of victims’ hesitancy to disclose their situation and health care practitioners' lack of training and institutional protocols, many trafficked persons go unrecognized. Methods We performed a scoping review of current literature. PubMed, SCOPUS, and reference lists were searched to identify articles for inclusion. We aimed to identify gaps in knowledge and shortcomings to assist this vulnerable population. Two reviewers independently screened literature search results and abstracted data from included studies. Descriptive analysis was conducted. Results We selected and analyzed 23 studies that focused on adult human sex trafficking identification, screening, interventions, or education in the ED. Eight (35%) of the publications used a survey model to quantitatively assess outcomes. Many of the other publications were descriptive or qualitative in nature, with some using a structured interview approach. We have observed that no validated or consistent screening tool exists for the identification of possible adult trafficked patients in the ED. However, we found that educational interventions and screening tools can improve health care practitioners’ confidence, victim identification, and knowledge of “next steps” for victims. Conclusions We found that most ED clinicians and staff have little or no formal training in sex trafficking victim identification, support, institutional protocols, or available local resources. Our review demonstrates a paucity of formal training programs, validated adult screening tools, and standardized institutional protocols to aid in the care of trafficked patients in the ED.

Objectives Emergency medicine physicians have played a pivotal role throughout the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID‐19) pandemic through in‐person and remote management and treatment. Our primary objectives were to understand emergency medicine physicians’ experiences using telehealth throughout the pandemic, any facilitators/barriers to successful usage, lessons learned during implementation, and successful/abandoned strategies used to engage with older adults. Methods Using a semi‐structured interview guide, we conducted 30‐min interviews. We used purposeful sampling to recruit emergency medicine physicians from all United States regions, rural–urban settings, and academic and community practices, who reported caring for patients 65 years or older in‐person or virtually during the pandemic. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed, double‐coded, and analyzed for emergent themes using framework analysis. Results A total of 15 in‐depth interviews were completed from September to November 2020. Physicians had a median age of 37 years, 7 were women, and 9 had experience with telehealth before the pandemic. We identified several themes: (1) there were various motivations for telehealth use; (2) telehealth was used primarily to supplement, not replace in‐person care; (3) most platforms were easy to use; (4) patients and caregivers had high acceptability of telemedicine; and (5) older adults with sensory and cognitive impairments often relied on caregivers. Emergency medicine physicians played a critical role during primary care office closures during the first wave—dispelling misinformation about COVID‐19, triaging patients to testing and treatment, and providing care that would otherwise have been deferred. Conclusions Our data show that telemedicine gained acceptability among emergency medicine physicians and provided options to patients who may have otherwise deferred care. These findings can inform future healthcare delivery for acute care needs or pandemic responses.

Patients present to the emergency department in various stages of chronic illness. Advance directives (ADs) aid emergency physicians in making treatment decisions, but only a minority of Americans have completed an AD, and the percentage of those who have discussed their end‐of‐life wishes may be even lower. This article addresses the use of common ADs and roadblocks to their use from the perspectives of families, patients, and physicians. Cases to examine new approaches to optimizing end‐of‐life conversations in patients who are chronically ill, such as the Improving Palliative Care in Emergency Medicine Project, a decision‐making framework that opens discussion for patients to gain understanding and determine preferences, and the Brief Negotiated Interview, a 7‐minute, scripted, motivational interview that determines willingness for behavior change and initiates care planning, are used.

Study objective Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, emergency physicians in the United States have faced unprecedented challenges, risks, and uncertainty while caring for patients in an already vulnerable healthcare system. As such, the pandemic has exacerbated high levels of negative emotions and burnout among emergency physicians, but little systematic qualitative work has documented these phenomena. The purpose of this qualitative investigation was to study emergency physicians’ emotional experiences in response to COVID‐19 and the coping strategies that they employed to navigate the pandemic. Methods From September 2020 to February 2021, we conducted semistructured interviews with 26 emergency physicians recruited from 2 early COVID‐19 epicenters: New York City and the Metro Boston region. Interviews, coding, and analyses were conducted using a grounded theory approach. Results Emergency physicians reported heightened anxiety, empathy, sadness, frustration, and anger during the pandemic. Physicians frequently attributed feelings of anxiety to medical uncertainty around the COVID‐19 virus, personal risk of contracting the virus and transmitting it to family members, the emergency environment, and resource availability. Emergency physicians also discussed the emotional effects of policies prohibiting patients’ family members from entering the emergency department (ED), both on themselves and patients. Sources of physician anger and frustration included changing policies and rules, hospital leadership and administration, and pay cuts. Some physicians described an evolving, ongoing coping process in response to the pandemic, and most identified collective discussion and processing within the emergency medicine community as an effective coping strategy. Conclusions Our findings underscore the need to investigate the effects of physicians’ pandemic‐related emotional stress and burnout on patient care. Evidence‐based interventions to support emergency physicians in coping with pandemic‐related trauma are needed.

Objective We sought to assess the effect of National Football League (NFL) games played by a regional sports team, the New England Patriots, on emergency department (ED) patient volume. Methods We conducted a multicenter, retrospective chart review at the following 3 tertiary centers in New England from 2012 to 2019: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; and Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME. Results Within the NFL season, we observed a 2.6% overall decrease (−10.4 patients) in average total daily volume across the study sites on Sundays when Patriots games were played compared with Sundays when games were not played (P = 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], −22.37 to 1.62). We observed a 4.3% reduction (−19.0 patients) in average total daily volume across the study sites on Mondays during which Patriots games were played compared with Mondays without games (P = 0.15; 95% CI, −43.51 to 5.47). Subanalyses on the 5‐hour period corresponding with each Patriots game showed reductions in mean patient volume per hour. Although our primary and subanalyses showed reductions in patient volume during Patriots games, these results were not statistically significant. Conclusions Our data support prior studies that showed a minimal impact of major sporting events on ED patient volume at tertiary centers. These results add to the limited data on this topic and can inform administrators whether staffing adjustments are necessary during similar types of sporting events.

Background A female patient known to have schizoaffective disorder self‐presented to an emergency department in a state of acute agitation and paranoia shortly after a 35‐day inpatient stay at a psychiatric facility. Case report The patient exhibited no signs or complaints of dyspnea or hypoxia, but later collapsed and became hypoxic after sleeping comfortably with sedation for 12 h in the psychiatric unit. She was intubated and a computed tomography angiogram revealed bilateral lobar pulmonary emboli and right heart strain. Conclusion Psychiatric hospitalizations, medications, diagnoses and relevant sequelae increase venous thromboembolism risk more than many realize.

Author(s): Schwab, Kim; Nguyen, Dacloc; Ungab, GilAnthony; Feld, Gregory; Maisel, Alan S; Than, Martin; Joyce, Laura; Peacock, W Frank | Abstract: ObjectiveAdvanced machine learning technology provides an opportunity to improve clinical electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation, allowing non-cardiology clinicians to initiate care for atrial fibrillation (AF). The Lucia Atrial Fibrillation Application (Lucia App) photographs the ECG to determine rhythm detection, calculates CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, and then provides guideline-recommended anticoagulation. Our purpose was to determine the rate of accurate AF identification and appropriate anticoagulation recommendations in emergency department (ED) patients ultimately diagnosed with AF.MethodsWe performed a single-center, observational retrospective chart review in an urban California ED, with an annual census of 70,000 patients. A convenience sample of hospitalized patients with AF as a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis were evaluated for accurate ED AF diagnosis and ED anticoagulation rates. This was done by comparing the Lucia App against a gold standard board-certified cardiologist diagnosis and using the American College of Emergency Physicians AF anticoagulation guidelines.ResultsTwo hundred and ninety seven patients were enrolled from January 2016 until December 2019. The median age was 79 years and 44.1% were female. Compared to the gold standard diagnosis, the Lucia App detected AF in 98.3% of the cases. Physicians recommended guideline-consistent anticoagulation therapy in 78.5%nversus 98.3% for the Lucia App. Of the patients with indications for anticoagulation and discharged from the ED, only 25.0% were started at discharge.ConclusionUse of a cloud-based ECG identification tool can allow non-cardiologists to achieve similar rates of AF identification as board-certified cardiologists and achieve higher rates of guideline-recommended anticoagulation therapy in the ED.

Objective Many emergency drug and fluid doses are weight dependent in adults, but in resuscitation and low‐resource settings it can be impractical or impossible to weigh a patient. It is especially important to obtain accurate weight estimation for dose calculations for emergency drugs with narrow therapeutic ranges. Several weight estimation methods have been proposed for use in adults, but none is widely established. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of adult weight estimation methods. Methods Demographic and body measurement data were obtained from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), and 7 previously published weight estimation methods were used to estimate the weight for each individual. The primary outcomes were the proportions of estimates within 10% and 20% of actual weight (P10, P20). An acceptable accuracy was predetermined to be P10 = 70% and P20 = 95%. Results The data set included 5158 adults (51.2% women) with sufficient data to calculate all weight estimation methods. The Lorenz method performed best (P10 = 86.8%, P20 = 99.4%) and met the standard of acceptability across sex and body mass index subgroups. The Mercy and PAWPER XL‐MAC methods performed acceptably in non‐obese adults. Conclusion The ideal weight estimation method should be accurate, rapid, simple, and feasible. This study has demonstrated the accuracy of 7 methods. The Lorenz method performed best but is complex and likely to be difficult to apply in resuscitation settings. Other simpler and quicker methods are at least as accurate as the best methods widely used in children, and there is potential for further calibrating these for use in adults before validation in real‐world studies.

Objective Limited data exist describing possible delays in patient transfer from the emergency department (ED) as a result of language barriers and the effects of interpretation services. We described the differences in ED length of stay (LOS) before intensive care unit (ICU) arrival and mortality based on availability of telephone or in‐person interpretation services. Methods Using an ICU database from an urban academic tertiary care hospital, ED patients entering the ICU were divided into groups based on primary language and available interpretation services (in‐person vs telephone). Non‐parametric tests were used to compare ED LOS and mortality between groups. Results Among 22,422 included encounters, English was recorded as the primary language for 51% of patients (11,427), and 9% of patients (2042) had a primary language other than English. Language was not documented for 40% of patients (8953). Among encounters with patients with non‐English primary languages, in‐person interpretation was available for 63% (1278) and telephone interpretation was available for 37% (764). In the English‐language group, median ED LOS was 292 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 205–412) compared with 309 minutes (IQR, 214–453) for patients speaking languages with in‐person interpretation available and 327 minutes (IQR, 225–463) for patients speaking languages with telephone interpretation available. Mortality was higher among patients with telephone (15%) or in‐person (11%) interpretation available compared with patients who primarily spoke English (9%). Conclusions Patients with primary languages other than English who were critically ill spent a median of 17 to 35 more minutes in the ED before ICU arrival and experienced higher mortality rates compared with patients who spoke English as a primary language.

Author(s): Tomaszewski, Christian A; Quenzer, Faith; Corbett, Bryan; Lafree, Andrew; Lasoff, Daniel; Romo, Jorge; Mukau, Leslie | Abstract: ObjectivesThe Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) is a validated, commonly used tool to objectively quantify withdrawal symptoms, often in anticipation of treatment with buprenorphine. Our primary aim was to determine the agreement between emergency department (ED) nurses compared with emergency physicians in determining this score in ED patients who presented for opioid withdrawal treatment. Secondarily, we wanted to investigate the safety of buprenorphine induction in the ED setting.MethodsScoring for opioid withdrawal using the COWS was performed by ED clinicians and ED nurses independently on 120 patients. In addition to overall concordance, agreement (weighted kappa) was calculated between the 2 scores by various cutoffs: overall severity, COWS ≥ 5, and the 11 different individual measures. Patient documents also were reviewed for complications that could be possibly linked to buprenorphine induction.ResultsOur study sample of 120 subjects was 77% Hispanic and 78.3% male. The clinicians assigned a median interquartile range overall COWS score of 6 (2-12), which categorizes as mild withdrawal. Seventy-eight (65%) subjects met the criteria of withdrawal (≥ 5 COWS) and 69 (58%) received an induction dose of buprenorphine (range 2nmg-24nmg) during the ED visit. No adverse effects or worsening withdrawal were reported. The overall observed concordance, based on severity withdrawal categorization, for all clinician pairs, was 67.5% (81/120) (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.7-75.2%). The weighted kappa for that concordance was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.43-0.67), giving a moderate strength of agreement. When data are dichotomized by COWS score ≥5, concordance was 82.5% (99/120) (95% CI, 74.7%-88.3%) and the weighted kappa was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.51-0.78), indicating substantial agreement. The breakdown by the 11 factors that constitute COWS showed only substantial agreement for pulse measurement.ConclusionThe agreement between ED clinicians and nurses for the overall COWS scoring in patients presenting for opioid withdrawal treatment was substantial. COWS scoring by ED nurses may help expedite treatment with buprenorphine on presentation.

Opioids are the main driver of drug overdose deaths in the United States, and there has been a marked increase in opioid‐related overdoses during the COVID‐19 public health emergency. Many emergency departments (EDs) across the country are implementing ED‐initiated buprenorphine programs, and this is a method to address and prevent opioid overdoses. Resources are available to overcome barriers and take action.

Objective The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has presented emergency departments (EDs) with many challenges to address the acute care needs of patients. Many EDs have leveraged telehealth to innovatively respond to these challenges. This review describes the landscape of telehealth initiatives in emergency care that have been described during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Methods We conducted a comprehensive, systematic review of the literature using PubMed, supplemented by a review of the gray literature (ie, non‐peer reviewed), with input from subject matter experts to identify telehealth initiatives in emergency care during coronavirus disease 2019. We categorized types of telehealth use based on purpose and user characteristics. Results We included 27 papers from our review of the medical literature and another 8 sources from gray literature review. The vast majority of studies (32/35) were descriptive in nature, with the additional inclusion of 2 cohort studies and one randomized clinical trial. There were 5 categories of ED telehealth use during the pandemic: (1) pre‐ED evaluation and screening, (2) within ED (including as a means of limiting staff and patient exposure and facilitating consultation with specialists), (3) post‐ED discharge monitoring and treatment, (4) educating trainees and health care workers, and (5) coordinating resources and patient care. Conclusion Telehealth has been used in a variety of manners during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, enabling innovation in emergency care delivery. The findings from this study can be used by institutions to consider how telehealth may address challenges in emergency care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and beyond. Because few studies included cost data and given the variability in institutional resources, how organizations implement telehealth programs will likely vary. Future work should further explore barriers and facilitators of innovation, and the impact on care delivery and patient outcomes.

Objective Our study sought to determine whether there was a change in emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic compared to prior years. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis using ED performance data 2018–2020 from 56 EDs across the United States. We used a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to assess differences in ED LOS for admitted (LOS‐A) and discharged (LOS‐D) patients during the COVID‐19 pandemic period compared to prior years. Results GEE modeling showed that LOS‐A and LOS‐D were significantly higher during the COVID‐19 period compared to the pre‐COVID‐19 period. LOS‐A during the COVID‐19 period was 10.3% higher compared to the pre‐COVID‐19 time period, which represents a higher geometric mean of 28 minutes. LOS‐D during the COVID‐19 period was 2.8% higher compared to the pre‐COVID‐19 time period, which represents a higher geometric mean of 2 minutes. Conclusions ED LOS‐A and LOS‐D were significantly higher in the COVID‐19 period compared to the pre‐COVID‐19 period despite a lower volume of patients in the COVID‐19 period.

Emergency department (ED) crowding is recognized as a critical threat to patient safety, while sub‐optimal ED patient flow also contributes to reduced patient satisfaction and efficiency of care. Provider in triage (PIT) programs—which typically involve, at a minimum, a physician or advanced practice provider conducting an initial screening exam and potentially initiating treatment and diagnostic testing at the time of triage—are frequently endorsed as a mechanism to reduce ED length of stay (LOS) and therefore mitigate crowding, improve patient satisfaction, and improve ED operational and financial performance. However, the peer‐reviewed evidence regarding the impact of PIT programs on measures including ED LOS, wait times, and costs (as variously defined) is mixed. Mechanistically, PIT programs exert their effects by initiating diagnostic work‐ups earlier and, sometimes, by equipping triage providers to directly disposition patients. However, depending on local contextual factors—including the co‐existence of other front‐end interventions and delays in ED throughput not addressed by PIT—we demonstrate how these features may or may not ultimately translate into reduced ED LOS in different settings. Consequently, site‐specific analysis of the root causes of excessive ED LOS, along with mechanistic assessment of potential countermeasures, is essential for appropriate deployment and successful design of PIT programs at individual EDs. Additional motivations for implementing PIT programs may include their potential to enhance patient safety, patient satisfaction, and team dynamics. In this conceptual article, we address a gap in the literature by demonstrating the mechanisms underlying PIT program results and providing a framework for ED decision‐makers to assess the local rationale for, operational feasibility of, and financial impact of PIT programs.

Objective The current study explored improved patient satisfaction scores at a single emergency department (ED) during the early phase of the COVID‐19 pandemic (March to May 2020). Methods A mixed‐methods design, integrating qualitative and quantitative data analyses, was employed to explore a total of 289 patient satisfaction survey ratings and 421 comments based on care that took place in the ED during the initial phase of the COVID‐19 epidemic. This allowed for comparisons to a more typical time period in the ED along with the emergence of novel categories of influence. Results The ED census was 31% lower during 2020 (COVID‐19) than the previous year, and a significantly greater percentage of patients in 2020 indicated that they would “definitely recommend” the ED compared with 2019. Wait time was mentioned in >40% of dissatisfied patient comments in 2019 but

Background Patients boarding in the emergency department (ED) as a result of delays in bed placement are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Prior literature on ED boarding does not explore the impact of boarding on patients admitted to the hospital from the ED. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of patient boarding on ED length of stay for all patients admitted to the hospital. Methods This was an institutional review board–approved, retrospective review of all patients from January 1, 2015, through June 30, 2019, presenting to 2 large EDs in a single health system in Pennsylvania. Quantile regression models were created to estimate the impact of patients boarding in the ED on length of stay for all ED patients admitted to the hospital. Results A total number of 466,449 ED encounters were analyzed across two EDs. At one ED, for every patient boarded, the median ED length of stay for all admitted patients increased by 14.0 minutes (P

Objective We assessed the impact of the transition from a primarily paper‐based electronic health record (EHR) to a comprehensive EHR on emergency physician work tasks and efficiency in an academic emergency department (ED). Methods We conducted a time motion study of emergency physicians on shift in our ED. Fifteen emergency physicians were directly observed for two 4‐hour sessions prior to EHR implementation, during go live, and then during post‐implementation. Observers performed continuous observation and measured times for the following tasks: chart review, direct patient care, documentation, physical movement, communication, teaching, handover, and other. We compared time spent on tasks during the 3 phases of transition and analyzed mean times for the tasks per patient and per shift using 2‐tailed t test for comparison. Results Physicians saw fewer patients per shift during go‐live (0.51 patient/hour, P < 0.01), patient efficiency increased in post‐implementation but did not recover to baseline (−0.31 patient/hour, P = 0.03). From pre‐implementation to post‐implementation, we observed a trend towards increased physician time spent charting (+54 seconds/patient, P = 0.05) and documenting (+36 seconds/patient, P = 0.36); time spent doing direct patient care trended towards decreasing (−0.43 seconds/patient, P = 0.23). A small percentage of shifts were spent receiving technical support and time spent on teaching activities remained relatively stable during EHR transition. Conclusion A new EHR impacts emergency physician task allocation and several changes are sustained post‐implementation. Physician efficiency decreased and did not recover to baseline. Understanding workflow changes during transition to EHR in the ED is necessary to develop strategies to maintain quality of care.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic created new emergency physician staffing challenges. Emergency physicians may be taken out of the workforce because of respiratory symptoms or pending severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test results. Vulnerable emergency physician populations with increased risk of serious disease and death from COVID‐19 include physicians at older ages; those with chronic medical conditions, including cardiac and pulmonary diseases and immunosuppression; and potentially pregnancy. We present our approach to planning for staffing issues through precision scheduling. We describe the actions taken to protect our vulnerable physicians and maximize our physician coverage. Measures include optimizing workforce; increasing backup call system; adjusting shifts based on patient arrival times, volume, and surge predictions; minimizing exposure to COVID‐19 and reduce personal protective equipment use through telemedicine, huddles, and, creating lower risk emergency department care areas; and standardizing intubations to limit exposure.

Study Objective Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) have many emergency department visits because of painful vaso‐occlusive episodes (VOE). Guidelines recommend treatment within 30 minutes of triage, but this is rarely achieved in clinical practice. Our goal was to develop an order set that is being implemented in the ED to facilitate and standardize emergency care for SCD patients in acute pain from VOEs presenting to the emergency department (ED) in New York City (NYC). Methods Using a RAND/University of California, Los Angeles modified Delphi panel, we convened a multidisciplinary panel and reviewed evidence on how to best manage SCD pain in the ED. Panelists collaboratively developed then rated 202 items that could be included in an ED order set. Results A consensus order set, a practical how‐to guide for managing SCD pain in the ED, was developed based on items that received high median ratings. Conclusions The management of acute pain experienced during VOEs is critical to patients with SCD; ED order sets, such as this one, can help standardize pain management, including at triage, evaluation, discharge, and follow‐up care. After implementation in NYC EDs, studies to examine changes in quality care metrics (eg, wait times, readmissions) are planned.

Objective Team leadership facilitates teamwork and is important to patient care. It is unknown whether physician gender‐based differences in team leadership exist. The objective of this study was to assess and compare team leadership and patient care in trauma resuscitations led by male and female physicians. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of data from a larger randomized controlled trial using video recordings of emergency department trauma resuscitations at a Level 1 trauma center from April 2016 to December 2017. Subjects included emergency medicine and surgery residents functioning as trauma team leaders. Eligible resuscitations included adult patients meeting institutional trauma activation criteria. Two video‐recorded observations for each participant were coded for team leadership quality and patient care by 2 sets of raters. Raters were balanced with regard to gender and were blinded to study hypotheses. We used Bayesian regression to determine whether our data supported gender‐based advantages in team leadership. Results A total of 60 participants and 120 video recorded observations were included. The modal relationship between gender and team leadership (β = 0.94, 95% highest density interval [HDI], ‐.68 to 2.52) and gender and patient care (β = 2.42, 95% HDI, ‐2.03 to 6.78) revealed a weak positive effect for female leaders on both outcomes. Gender‐based advantages to team leadership and clinical care were not conclusively supported or refuted, with the exception of rejecting a strong male advantage to team leadership. Conclusions We prospectively measured team leadership and clinical care during patient care. Our findings do not support differences in trauma resuscitation team leadership or clinical care based on the gender of the team leader.

Objective The objective of this study was to determine whether crowding influences treatment times and disposition decisions for emergency department (ED) patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study at 2 hospitals from January 1, 2014, to July 1, 2014. Adult ED visits with dispositions of discharge, admission, or transfer were included. Treatment times were modeled by linear regression with log‐transformation; disposition decisions (admission or transfer vs discharge) were modeled by logistic regression. Both models adjusted for chief complaint, Emergency Severity Index (ESI), and 4 crowding metrics in quartiles: waiting count, treatment count, boarding count, and National Emergency Department Overcrowding Scale. Results We included 21,382 visits at site A (12.9% excluded) and 29,193 at site B (15.0% excluded). Respective quartiles of treatment count increased treatment times by 7.1%, 10.5%, and 13.3% at site A (P

As physician workforce shortages persist, physician reentry is an important and timely issue for the specialty of emergency medicine. Physician reentry is defined as a return to clinical practice following an extended period of clinical inactivity not resulting from discipline or impairment. This review provides a general overview of the physician reentry published literature with a focus on the specialty of emergency medicine. Transition into a non‐clinical position, personal health, family issues, and career dissatisfaction all contribute to physicians leaving the workforce voluntarily. Previously, the majority of reentry physicians did not pursue additional training prior to returning to the workforce; however, regulatory agencies are now increasingly requiring additional training, standardized testing, and fitness to practice evaluations prior to restarting clinical work. The burden of proof is on the reentry physician to meet the appropriate requirements for licensure, certification, and credentialing prior to returning to clinical work.

Allocation of limited resources in pandemics begs for ethical guidance. The issue of ventilator allocation in pandemics has been reviewed by many medical ethicists, but as localities activate crisis standards of care, and health care workers are infected from patient exposure, the decision to pursue cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) must also be examined to better balance the increased risks to healthcare personnel with the very low resuscitation rates of patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) . A crisis standard of care that is equitable, transparent, and mindful of both human and physical resources will lessen the impact on society in this era of COVID‐19. This paper builds on previous work of ventilator allocation in pandemic crises to propose a literature‐based, justice‐informed ethical framework for selecting treatment options for CPR. The pandemic affects regions differently over time, so these suggested guidelines may require adaptation to local practice variations.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Objectives: Emergency department boarding is the practice of caring for admitted patients in the emergency department after hospital admission, and boarding has been a growing problem in the United States. Boarding of the critically ill has achieved specific attention because of its association with poor clinical outcomes. Accordingly, the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Emergency Physicians convened a Task Force to understand the implications of emergency department boarding of the critically ill. The objective of this article is to review the U.S. literature on (1) the frequency of emergency department boarding among the critically ill, (2) the outcomes associated with critical care patient boarding, and (3) local strategies developed to mitigate the impact of emergency department critical care boarding on patient outcomes. Data Sources and Study Selection: Review article. Data Extraction and Data Synthesis: Emergency department–based boarding of the critically ill patient is common, but no nationally representative frequency estimates has been reported. Boarding literature is limited by variation in the definitions used for boarding and variation in the facilities studied (boarding ranges from 2% to 88% of ICU admissions). Prolonged boarding in the emergency department has been associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and higher mortality. Health systems have developed multiple mitigation strategies to address emergency department boarding of critically ill patients, including emergency department-based interventions, hospital-based interventions, and emergency department–based resuscitation care units. Conclusions: Emergency department boarding of critically ill patients was common and was associated with worse clinical outcomes. Health systems have generated a number of strategies to mitigate these effects. A definition for emergency department boarding is proposed. Future work should establish formal criteria for analysis and benchmarking of emergency department–based boarding overall, with subsequent efforts focused on developing and reporting innovative strategies that improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients boarded in the emergency department.

Objective The objective of this study was to develop a US‐representative prediction model identifying factors with a greater likelihood of patients leaving without being seen. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using a 2016 nationwide emergency department (ED) sample. Patient factors considered for analysis were the following: age, sex, acuity, chronic diseases, weekend visit, quarter of presentation, median household income quartile for patient's zip code, primary/secondary insurance, total charges for the visit, and urban/rural household. Hospital factors considered were urban/rural location, trauma center/teaching hospital, and annual ED volume. Multivariable logistic regression was used to find significant predictors and their interactions. A random forest algorithm was used to determine the order of importance of factors. Results A total of 32,680,232 hospital‐based ED visits with 466,047 incidences of leaving without being seen were included. The cohort comprised 55.5% females, with a median (IQR) age of 37 (21–58) years. Positively associating factors were male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 99% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–1.26), lower acuity (P < 0.001), and annual ED visits ≥60,000 (OR, 1.44; 99% CI, 1.21–1.7) versus 64 or, Patients leaving without being seen from the emergency department: A prediction model using machine learning on a nationwide database. Sheraton et al.

Introduction Despite the growing investment in and adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine, the applications of AI in an emergency setting remain unclear. This scoping review seeks to identify available literature regarding the applications of AI in emergency medicine. Methods The scoping review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for scoping reviews using Medline‐OVID, EMBASE, CINAHL, and IEEE, with a double screening and extraction process. The search included articles published until February 28, 2020. Articles were excluded if they did not self‐classify as studying an AI intervention, were not relevant to the emergency department (ED), or did not report outcomes or evaluation. Results Of the 1483 original database citations, 395 were eligible for full‐text evaluation. Of these articles, a total of 150 were included in the scoping review. The majority of included studies were retrospective in nature (n = 124, 82.7%), with only 3 (2.0%) prospective controlled trials. We found 37 (24.7%) interventions aimed at improving diagnosis within the ED. Among the 150 studies, 19 (12.7%) focused on diagnostic imaging within the ED. A total of 16 (10.7%) studies were conducted in the out‐of‐hospital environment (eg, emergency medical services, paramedics) with the remainder occurring either in the ED or the trauma bay. Of the 24 (16%) studies that had human comparators, there were 12 (8%) studies in which AI interventions outperformed clinicians in at least 1 measured outcome. Conclusion AI‐related research is rapidly increasing in emergency medicine. There are several promising AI interventions that can improve emergency care, particularly for acute radiographic imaging and prediction‐based diagnoses. Higher quality evidence is needed to further assess both short‐ and long‐term clinical outcomes.

Background Emergency physicians must maintain procedural skills, but clinical opportunities may be insufficient. We sought to determine how often practicing emergency physicians in academic, community and freestanding emergency departments (EDs) perform 4 procedures: central venous catheterization (CVC), tube thoracostomy, tracheal intubation, and lumbar puncture (LP). Methods This was a retrospective study evaluating emergency physician procedural performance over a 12‐month period. We collected data from the electronic records of 18 EDs in one healthcare system. The study EDs included higher and lower volume, academic, community and freestanding, and trauma and non‐trauma centers. The main outcome measures were median number of procedures performed. We examined differences in procedural performance by physician years in practice, facility type, and trauma status. Results Over 12 months, 182 emergency physicians performed 1582 of 2805 procedures (56%) and supervised (resident, nurse practitioner or physician assistant) an additional 1223 of the procedures they did not perform (43%). Median (interquartile range) physician performance for each procedure was CVC 0 [0, 2], tube thoracostomy 0 [0, 0], tracheal intubation 3 [0.25, 8], and LP 0 [0, 2]. The percentage of emergency physicians who did not perform at least one of each procedure during the 1‐year time frame ranged from 25.3% (tracheal intubation) to 76.4% (tube thoracostomy). Physicians who work at high‐volume EDs (>50,000 visits per year) performed nearly twice as many tracheal intubations, CVCs, and LPs than those at low‐volume EDs or freestanding EDs when normalized per 1000 visits. Years out of training were inversely related to total number of procedures performed. Emergency physicians at trauma centers performed almost 3 times as many tracheal intubations and almost 4 times as many CVCs compared to non‐trauma centers. Conclusion In a large healthcare system, regardless of ED type, emergency physicians infrequently performed the 4 procedures studied. Physicians in high‐volume EDs, trauma centers, and recent graduates performed more procedures. Our study adds to a growing body of research that suggests clinical frequency alone may be insufficient for all emergency physicians to maintain competency.

Rapid advances in cancer immunotherapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors have led to significantly improved survival. Rapid identification of the toxicity syndromes associated with these therapeutic agents is very important for emergency physicians because the population of patients diagnosed with cancer is increasing and cancer therapies including immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the first‐line treatment for more and more types of cancer. The emergency medicine literature lags behind rapid advances in oncology, and oncology guidelines for rapid recognition and management of these emerging toxicity syndromes are not familiar to emergency physicians. In this review article, we discuss the clinical presentation and management of immune‐related adverse effects during the critical first hours of emergency care. We also suggest a workflow for the recognition and treatment of emergencies arising from serious immune‐related adverse effects, including but not limited to colitis, adrenal crisis, myocarditis, pneumonitis, myasthenic crisis, diabetic ketoacidosis, bullous pemphigus, and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Rapid advances in cancer therapy are bringing new diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to emergency providers, and therefore it is crucial to raise awareness and provide guidelines for the management of new treatment‐related toxicities.