Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Health outcomes among older emergency department (ED) patients may be influenced by physical, economic, and psychological problems not routinely identified during the ED visit. The objective of this study was to characterize such problems among older adults presenting to the ED. ⋯ Nonmedical problems are common among cognitively intact, independent living, non-critically ill older patients presenting to an ED in the southeast United States.
-
The initial step in certification by the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) requires passing a multiple-choice-question qualifying examination. The qualifying examination is typically taken in the first year after residency training. This study was undertaken to determine if a delay in taking the qualifying examination is associated with poorer performance. The authors also examined the relationship between in-training examination scores and qualifying examination scores. ⋯ After accounting for innate ability using in-training examination scores, delay taking the qualifying examination was associated with poorer performance. This effect was more pronounced if the delay was ≥2 years.
-
The standardized letter of evaluation (SLOE) was created in 1997 to provide residency program directors (PDs) with a summative evaluation that incorporates normative grading (i.e., comparisons to peers applying to emergency medicine [EM] training). Although the standard letter of recommendation (SLOR) has become increasingly popular and important in decision-making, it has not been studied in the past 12 years. To assess the SLOR's effectiveness and limitations, the perspective of EM PDs was surveyed in this study. ⋯ The SLOR appears to be the most important tool in the EM PD's armamentarium for determining which candidates should be interviewed for residency training. Although valuable, the SLOR's potential utility is hampered by a number of factors, the most important of which is inflated evaluations. Focused changes in the SLOR template should be mindful that it appears, in general, to be successful in its intended purpose.
-
Observational Study
Rapid Response Team Activations Within 24 Hours of Admission From the Emergency Department: An Innovative Approach for Performance Improvement.
Performance improvement programs in emergency medicine (EM) have evolved beyond peer reviews of referred cases and now encompass a large set of quality metrics that are measured proactively. However, peer review of cases continues to be an important element of performance improvement, and selection of cases tends to be driven by an ad hoc referral process based on concerns about problems with care in the emergency department (ED). In the past decade, there has been widespread hospital adoption of rapid response teams (RRTs) that respond to patients who decline clinically to reduce adverse outcomes. In an effort to cast a wider net, to take a more systematic approach, and to avoid "blind spots" from individual variability in criteria for referring cases, the institution instituted a new process for selecting cases for ED peer review based on RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED. The hypothesis was that a formal process for review of these activation cases would increase the number of cases for peer review. ⋯ The review of RRT activations within 24 hours of admission from the ED significantly supplemented the typical ad hoc referral system for peer review of cases, highlighting cases that likely would not have received attention within the ED. This novel and unique case review process revealed opportunities for education and performance improvement. This and other systematic approaches to case detection may be useful adjuncts to traditional case referrals for review.
-
In 2001, "The Model of the Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine" was first published. This document, the first of its kind, was the result of an extensive practice analysis of emergency department (ED) visits and several expert panels, overseen by representatives from six collaborating professional organizations (the American Board of Emergency Medicine, the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, the Residency Review Committee for Emergency Medicine, the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors, and the Emergency Medicine Residents' Association). Every 2 years, the document is reviewed by these organizations to identify practice changes, incorporate new evidence, and identify perceived deficiencies. For this revision, a seventh organization was included, the American Academy of Emergency Medicine.