Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Cognitive support technologies that support clinical decisions and practices in the emergency department (ED) have the potential to optimize patient care. However, limited uptake by clinicians can prevent successful implementation. A better understanding of acceptance of these technologies from the clinician perspective is needed. We conducted a scoping review to synthesize diverse, emerging evidence on clinicians' acceptance of point-of-care (POC) cognitive support technology in the ED. ⋯ Findings from this scoping review suggest that while ED clinicians acknowledge the utility and value of using POC cognitive support technology, actual use of such technology can be low. Further, few studies have evaluated the acceptance and use of POC technologies in routine care. Prospective studies that evaluate how ED clinicians appraise and consider POC technology use in clinical practice are now needed with diverse clinician samples. While this review identified multiple factors contributing to technology acceptance, determining how clinician, technical, patient, and organizational factors mediate or moderate acceptance should also be a priority.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Effectiveness of a Specialized Brief Intervention for At-risk Drinkers in an Emergency Department: Short-term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been developed, evaluated, and shown to be effective, particularly in primary care and general practice. Nevertheless, effectiveness of SBIRT in emergency departments (EDs) has not been clearly established. ⋯ Of 3,027 patients presenting to the ED, 2,044 (67%) were potentially eligible to participate, 247 (12%) screened positive for at-risk drinking, and 200 agreed to participate. Seventy-two percent of the participating sample were men, and the mean (±SD) age was 43 (±16.7) years. Follow-up rates were 76.5%. At 1.5 months, the intervention group showed greater reductions in alcohol consumption and fewer patients continuing with at-risk alcohol use (27.8% vs. 48.1%; p = 0.01). The SBIRT program also increased the probability of attending specialized treatment, compared to the control condition (23% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.0119) CONCLUSION: The SBIRT program in the ED was found to be feasible and effective in identifying at-risk drinkers, reducing at-risk alcohol use, and increasing treatment for alcohol problems.
-
We aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the demographics, prevalence, clinical characteristics, and evidence-based management of homeless persons in the emergency department (ED). Where appropriate, we highlight knowledge gaps and suggest directions for future research. ⋯ Homelessness may be underrecognized in the ED setting. Homeless ED patients have distinct care needs and patterns of ED utilization that are unmet by the current disease-oriented and episodic models of emergency medicine. More research is needed to determine the prevalence and characteristics of homelessness in the ED and to develop evidence-based treatment strategies in caring for this vulnerable population.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Protocolized Laboratory Screening for the Medical Clearance of Psychiatric Patients in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review.
Emergency department (ED) patients with psychiatric chief complaints undergo medical screening to rule out underlying or comorbid medical illnesses prior to transfer to a psychiatric facility. This systematic review attempts to determine the clinical utility of protocolized laboratory screening for the streamlined medical clearance of ED psychiatric patients by determining the clinical significance of individual laboratory results. ⋯ The prevalence of clinically significant laboratory test results were low, suggesting that according to the available literature, routine laboratory testing does not significantly change patient disposition. Due to the paucity of available research on this subject, we could not determine the clinical utility of protocolized laboratory screening tests for medical clearance of psychiatric patients in the ED. Future research on the utility of routine laboratory testing is important in a move toward shared decision making and patient-centered health care.