Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the PTSD Coach App Following Motor Vehicle Crash-Related Injury.
Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms (PTSS) are common after minor injuries and can impair recovery. We sought to understand whether an evidence-based mobile phone application with self-help tools (PTSD Coach) could be useful to improve recovery after acute trauma among injured emergency department (ED) patients. This pilot study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and potential benefit of using PTSD Coach among acutely injured motor vehicle crash (MVC) patients. ⋯ We demonstrated feasibility to recruit acutely injured ED patients into an app-based intervention study, yet mixed evidence emerged for the usability and benefit of PTSD Coach. Most patients used the app once and rated it favorably in regard to satisfaction with and helpfulness, but longitudinal engagement was low. This latter finding may explain the lack of overall effects on PTSS. Additional research is warranted regarding whether targeting more symptomatic patients and the addition of engagement and support features can improve efficacy.
-
The objectives of this study were 1) to describe the current use of etomidate and other induction agents in patients with sepsis and 2) to compare adverse events between etomidate and ketamine in sepsis. ⋯ Etomidate is used less frequently in sepsis patients than nonsepsis patients, with ketamine being the most frequently used alternative. Ketamine was associated with more postprocedural hypotension than etomidate. Future clinical trials are needed to determine the optimal induction agent in patients with sepsis.
-
We examined emergency department (ED) advanced practice provider (APP) productivity and how APP staffing impacted ED productivity, safety, flow, and experience. ⋯ In this group, APPs treated less complex visits and half as many patients/hour compared to physicians. Higher APP coverage allowed physicians to treat higher-acuity cases. We found no economies of scale for APP coverage, suggesting that increasing APP staffing may not lower staffing costs. However, there were also no adverse observed effects of APP coverage on ED flow, clinical safety, or patient experience, suggesting little risk of increased APP coverage on clinical care delivery.