scholarly journals 38 Transforming post triage assessment of chest pain in a busy emergency department (ED), from ED doctor to advanced nurse practitioner (ANP) direct; the impact on patient experience times (PET)

Author(s):  
S Ingram
2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Ingram

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Chest pain accounts for 8% of local Emergency Department (ED) presentations. Patient experience time (PET) is the entire time each patient spends in ED and the national ED PET goal is 6 - 9 hours. The Cardiology Advanced Nurse Practitioner (ANP) consult service reduced PET for patients with chest pain from 17 hours, however the average PET for patients presenting with chest pain remains high at 10 hours in 2019. Aim To assess the impact on of ANP Cardiology autonomy on the PET of chest pain patients who present to a busy ED. Method Building on 6 years of ANP chest pain consultations in the ED, cardiology ANPs expanded their caseload to fully manage chest pain patients directly from the waiting room as named clinicians, instead of an ED doctor.  The ANP managed the patient completely from triage to diagnosis, resulting in discharge or admission. Enablers included ANP referral for ionising radiation and medicinal prescribing, with buy in from ED Consultants and Cardiology clinical lead. All patients managed directly by the ANP from 2017-2019 were included in the data analysis. The ED symphony system was used as a clinical and audit tool. ANP chest pain PET was compared to ED Doctor chest pain PET. This service evaluation was approved by the hospital audit committee.  Results 197 patients who presented with chest pain were autonomously managed by one ANP as a named clinician over 3 years. Sixty-four percent were managed completely autonomously.  Eighty per cent were discharged from ED. ANP decision time from initial assessment to admit or discharge was 2.6 hours. The ANP average chest pain PET time was 7.5 hours compared to average ED doctor chest pain PET of 9.5 hours. Conclusions As social distancing now impacts more than ever on usual ED pressures, caseload expansion by the Cardiology ANPs evidences further PET reductions for patients who present with chest pain in line with targets. As only one ANP is on the floor and not every shift, many hours of the PET occurred in the ED prior to the ANP ‘clicking’ on as a named clinician. Professional courage to completely manage this potentially high risk cohort autonomously has been welcomed patients and ED staff. PET of the chest pain patient has the potential to reduce further with more ANPs proficient in chest pain assessment within the emergency department setting.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110114
Author(s):  
Andrew Nyce ◽  
Snehal Gandhi ◽  
Brian Freeze ◽  
Joshua Bosire ◽  
Terry Ricca ◽  
...  

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.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e024501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Cooper ◽  
Freya Davies ◽  
Michelle Edwards ◽  
Pippa Anderson ◽  
Andrew Carson-Stevens ◽  
...  

ObjectivesWorldwide, emergency healthcare systems are under intense pressure from ever-increasing demand and evidence is urgently needed to understand how this can be safely managed. An estimated 10%–43% of emergency department patients could be treated by primary care services. In England, this has led to a policy proposal and £100 million of funding (US$130 million), for emergency departments to stream appropriate patients to a co-located primary care facility so they are ‘free to care for the sickest patients’. However, the research evidence to support this initiative is weak.DesignRapid realist literature review.SettingEmergency departments.Inclusion criteriaArticles describing general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments.AimTo develop context-specific theories that explain how and why general practitioners working in or alongside emergency departments affect: patient flow; patient experience; patient safety and the wider healthcare system.ResultsNinety-six articles contributed data to theory development sourced from earlier systematic reviews, updated database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane DSR & CRCT, DARE, HTA Database, BSC, PsycINFO and SCOPUS) and citation tracking. We developed theories to explain: how staff interpret the streaming system; different roles general practitioners adopt in the emergency department setting (traditional, extended, gatekeeper or emergency clinician) and how these factors influence patient (experience and safety) and organisational (demand and cost-effectiveness) outcomes.ConclusionsMultiple factors influence the effectiveness of emergency department streaming to general practitioners; caution is needed in embedding the policy until further research and evaluation are available. Service models that encourage the traditional general practitioner approach may have shorter process times for non-urgent patients; however, there is little evidence that this frees up emergency department staff to care for the sickest patients. Distinct primary care services offering increased patient choice may result in provider-induced demand. Economic evaluation and safety requires further research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017069741.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1150
Author(s):  
Jamie Yu-Hsuan Chen ◽  
Feng-Yee Chang ◽  
Chin-Sheng Lin ◽  
Chih-Hung Wang ◽  
Shih-Hung Tsai ◽  
...  

The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on health-care quality in the emergency department (ED) in countries with a low risk is unclear. This study aimed to explore the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on ED loading, quality of care, and patient prognosis. Data were retrospectively collected from 1 January 2018 to 30 September 2020 at the ED of Tri-service general hospital. Analyses included day-based ED loading, quality of care, and patient prognosis. Data on triage assessment, physiological states, disease history, and results of laboratory tests were collected and analyzed. The number of daily visits significantly decreased after the pandemic, leading to a reduction in the time to examination. Admitted patients benefitted from the pandemic with a reduction of 0.80 h in the length of stay in the ED, faster discharge without death, and reduced re-admission. However, non-admitted visits with chest pain increased the risk of mortality after the pandemic. In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant reduction in low-acuity ED visits and improved prognoses for hospitalized patients. However, clinicians should be alert about patients with chest pain due to their increased risk of mortality in subsequent admission.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 268-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shanthi Sivendran ◽  
Rachel Holliday ◽  
Ronald Guittar ◽  
Christine Cox ◽  
Kristina Newport

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 394-401
Author(s):  
Deana Nelson ◽  
Larry R. Hearld ◽  
David Wein

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document