THE JAM IN THE SANDWICH, DOWN HERE IN A&E': STAFF PERSPECTIVES ON THE IMPACT AND CAUSES OF HANDOVER DELAYS BETWEEN THE AMBULANCE SERVICE AND THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. e16.3-e17
Author(s):  
Alison Porter ◽  
Bridie Angela Evans ◽  
Becky Gammon ◽  
Robert Harris Mayes ◽  
Mark Poulden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Ambulance Service ◽  
The Impact

PP40 Pre-hospital and emergency department analgesia for paediatric trauma – a survey of UK trauma centres and ambulance services supports consideration of alternatives such as ketamine

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (9) ◽  
pp. A16.3-A17
Author(s):  
David Fish ◽  
Fiona Bell ◽  
Clare O’Connell ◽  
Alison Walker ◽  
Laura Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Ambulance Service ◽  
Trauma Centres ◽  
Administration Routes ◽  
Controlled Drugs ◽  
Medical Directors ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundStudies have found that pre-hospital and emergency department (ED) analgesia for children is sub-optimal. In the pre-hospital setting, barriers include limited parenteral routes, education or clinical experience and practice legislation restricting the use of opioids by paramedics. Ketamine is safe and effective with multiple administration routes. It is not bound by the controlled drugs limitations in the pre-hospital setting, and is familiar to pre-hospital and ED practitioners.MethodsQuestionnaires were sent to all UK Ambulance Service Medical Directors and Paediatric Major Trauma Centres to establish current use of parenteral analgesics, and acceptability of alternatives in pre-hospital care such as ketamine. Descriptive analysis was undertaken.ResultsIntranasal opiates were the first line parenteral analgesics in injured children in all EDs. Frequent shortages of IN diamorphine resulted in more variability of second line choices, with 40% opting for another opioid. 96% of EDs would support the use of ketamine by pre-hospital clinicians, although concerns regarding inappropriate (IV) use and use by technician crews were raised. Most ED clinicians were unaware of the limited analgesic choices available to paramedics, with many suggesting alternative opiates as well as ketamine.All ambulance service directors recognised the need for alternative analgesics being made available. Without legislative changes, inhaled/IN agents or oral opiates were the only current options. All services were supportive of research to explore the use of ketamine by paramedics for injured children.ConclusionsThere is support for the addition of IN ketamine into paramedics’ repertoire of analgesics and recognition of potential benefit. However, there is a lack of experience and evidence around its use, thus warranting research to consider the impact on analgesic timeliness, adequacy and effectiveness. An analgesia ‘system of care’ which integrates pre- and in-hospital practice would be facilitated by the use of medicines effective in managing pain and familiar to practitioners in both settings.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Emergency Department Attendance in a Vulnerable Population - The What, and the Why

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca L. Jessup ◽  
Cassandra Bramston ◽  
Alison Beauchamp ◽  
Anthony Gust ◽  
Natali Cvetanovska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Vulnerable Population ◽  
Emergency Department Attendance ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals The Impact of a Concierge Medicine Model on Door to Doctor Time and Patient Flow in an Urban Emergency Department

2020 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 13-18
Author(s):  
Asher L Mandel ◽  
Thomas Bove ◽  
Amisha D Parekh ◽  
Paris Datillo ◽  
Joseph Bove Jr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Patient Flow ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Urban Emergency Department

scholarly journals The negative effects of COVID-19 and national lockdown on emergency surgery morbidity due to delayed access

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco A. Ciarleglio ◽  
Marta Rigoni ◽  
Liliana Mereu ◽  
Cai Tommaso ◽  
Alessandro Carrara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Emergency Surgery ◽  
Surgical Care ◽  
Close Correlation ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Retrospective Comparative Study ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Background The aim of this retrospective comparative study was to assess the impact of COVID-19 and delayed emergency department access on emergency surgery outcomes, by comparing the main clinical outcomes in the period March–May 2019 (group 1) with the same period during the national COVID-19 lockdown in Italy (March–May 2020, group 2). Methods A comparison (groups 1 versus 2) and subgroup analysis were performed between patients’ demographic, medical history, surgical, clinical and management characteristics. Results Two-hundred forty-six patients were included, 137 in group 1 and 109 in group 2 (p = 0.03). No significant differences were observed in the peri-operative characteristics of the two groups. A declared delay in access to hospital and preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were 15.5% and 5.8%, respectively in group 2. The overall morbidity (OR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.08–4.55, p = 0.03) and 30-day mortality (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.33–5.50, =0.68) were significantly higher in group 2. The delayed access cohort showed a close correlation with increased morbidity (OR = 3.19, 95% CI 0.89–11.44, p = 0.07), blood transfusion (OR = 5.13, 95% CI 1.05–25.15, p = 0.04) and 30-day mortality risk (OR = 8.00, 95% CI 1.01–63.23, p = 0.05). SARS-CoV-2-positive patients had higher risk of blood transfusion (20% vs 7.8%, p = 0.37) and ICU admissions (20% vs 2.6%, p = 0.17) and a longer median LOS (9 days vs 4 days, p = 0.11). Conclusions This article provides enhanced understanding of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient access to emergency surgical care. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 changed the quality of surgical care with poorer prognosis and higher morbidity rates. Delayed emergency department access and a “filter effect” induced by a fear of COVID-19 infection in the population resulted in only the most severe cases reaching the emergency department in time.

scholarly journals Association of Emergency Department Waiting Times With Patient Experience in Admitted and Discharged Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110114
Author(s):  
Andrew Nyce ◽  
Snehal Gandhi ◽  
Brian Freeze ◽  
Joshua Bosire ◽  
Terry Ricca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Waiting Times ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Short Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Patient’S Experience ◽  
Discharged Patients ◽  
The Impact

Prolonged waiting times are associated with worse patient experience in patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). However, it is unclear which component of the waiting times is most impactful to the patient experience and the impact on hospitalized patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of ED patients between July 2018 and March 30, 2020. In all, 3278 patients were included: 1477 patients were discharged from the ED, and 1680 were admitted. Discharged patients had a longer door-to-first provider and door-to-doctor time, but a shorter doctor-to-disposition, disposition-to-departure, and total ED time when compared to admitted patients. Some, but not all, components of waiting times were significantly higher in patients with suboptimal experience (<100th percentile). Prolonged door-to-doctor time was significantly associated with worse patient experience in discharged patients and in patients with hospital length of stay ≤4 days. Prolonged ED waiting times were significantly associated with worse patient experience in patients who were discharged from the ED and in inpatients with short length of stay. Door-to-doctor time seems to have the highest impact on the patient’s experience of these 2 groups.

Assessment of a multi-center tele-urgent care program to decrease emergency department referral rates in the Veterans Health Administration

2021 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2110248
Author(s):  
Charlie M Wray ◽  
Myla Junge ◽  
Salomeh Keyhani ◽  
Janeen E Smith
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Emergency Department Visit ◽  
Care Program ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Emergency Department Utilization ◽  
Emergency Department Care ◽  
Referral Rates ◽  
Care Assessment ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Care Evaluation

The use of emergency departments for non-emergent issues has led to overcrowding and decreased the quality of care. Telemedicine may be a mechanism to decrease overutilization of this expensive resource. From April to September 2020, we assessed (a) the impact of a multi-center tele-urgent care program on emergency department referral rates and (b) the proportion of individuals who had a subsequent emergency department visit within 72 h of tele-urgent care evaluation when they were not referred to the emergency department. We then performed a chart review to assess whether patients presented to the emergency department for the same reason as was stated for their tele-urgent care evaluation, whether subsequent hospitalization was needed during that emergency department visit, and whether death occurred. Among the 2510 patients who would have been referred to in-person emergency department care, but instead received tele-urgent care assessment, one in five (21%; n = 533) were subsequently referred to the emergency department. Among those not referred following tele-urgent care, 1 in 10 (11%; n = 162) visited the emergency department within 72 h. Among these 162 individuals, most (91%) returned with the same or similar complaint as what was assessed during their tele-urgent care visit, with one in five requiring hospitalization (19%, n = 31) with one individual (0.01%) dying. In conclusion, tele-urgent care may safely decrease emergency department utilization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document