Dataset Information

A randomised trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of different emergency department healthcare professionals in soft tissue injury management.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of soft tissue injury management by emergency nurse practitioners (ENPs) and extended scope physiotherapists (ESPs) compared to the routine care provided by doctors in a UK emergency department (ED).Randomised, pragmatic trial of equivalence.One adult ED in England.372 patients were randomised; 126 to the ESP group, 123 to the ENP group and 123 to the doctor group. Participants were adults (older than 16 years) presenting to the ED with a peripheral soft tissue injury eligible for management by any of the three professional groups. Patients were excluded if they had any of the following: injury greater than 72 hours old; systemic disease; dislocated joints; recent surgery; unable to give informed consent (eg, dementia), open wounds; major deformities; opiate analgesia required; concurrent chest/rib injury; neurovascular deficits and associated fracture.Patients were randomised to treatment by ESPs, ENPs or routine care provided by doctors (of all grades).Upper-limb and lower-limb functional scores, quality of life, physical well-being, preference-based health measures and the number of days off work.The clinical outcomes of soft tissue injury treated by ESPs and ENPs in the ED were equivalent to routine care provided by doctors.As all groups were clinically equivalent it is other factors such as cost, workforce sustainability, service provision and skill mix that become important. This result validates the role of the ENP, which is becoming established as an integral part of minor injuries care, and demonstrates that the ESP should be considered as part of the clinical skill mix without detriment to outcomes. ISRCTN-ISRCTN TRIALS REGISTER NUMBER: 70891354.

SUBMITTER: McClellan CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3533121 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomised trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of different emergency department healthcare professionals in soft tissue injury management.

McClellan Carey Middleton CM Cramp Fiona F Powell Jane J Benger Jonathan Richard JR

BMJ open 20121108 6

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of soft tissue injury management by emergency nurse practitioners (ENPs) and extended scope physiotherapists (ESPs) compared to the routine care provided by doctors in a UK emergency department (ED).<h4>Design</h4>Randomised, pragmatic trial of equivalence.<h4>Setting</h4>One adult ED in England.<h4>Participants</h4>372 patients were randomised; 126 to the ESP group, 123 to the ENP group and 123 to the doctor group. Participants were adul ...[more]

PMID: 23144256

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost effectiveness of soft tissue injury management by emergency nurse practitioners (ENPs) and extended scope physiotherapists (ESPs) compared with the routine care provided by doctors in an emergency department (ED).DesignRandomised, pragmatic trial of equivalence.SettingA single ED in England.Participants372 patients were randomised, 126 to the ESP group, 123 to the ENP group and 123 to the doctor group. Participants were adults (16 years and older) presenting to the ED with a peripheral soft tissue injury eligible for management by any of the three professional groups.InterventionsPatients were randomised to treatment by an ESP, ENP or routine care provided by doctors (of all grades).Main outcome measuresEconomic cost-minimisation evaluation from a funder perspective of the National Health Service, England incorporating analysis of the direct, indirect and tangible costs of care in primary and secondary settings.ResultsFrom a funder perspective in primary and secondary care, ESPs and ENPs are at best equivalent and could not cost less than routine care. Uncertainty in cost arises from ESPs and ENPs incurring greater indirect costs, such as those associated with follow-up appointments and subsequent primary care visits. Comparison from a funder perspective in secondary care, that is, considering those costs incurred in secondary care alone, demonstrates that ENPs are equivalent in cost to routine care, while ESPs are either equivalent or possibly cheaper than routine care.ConclusionsThese results question the notion that training the healthcare workforce to undertake extensions of their role is generally cost effective. While the randomised trial indicated that the three professional groups have equivalent clinical outcomes, this economic analysis suggests that substitution of routine care with a predominantly ESP or ENP workforce could prove more expensive. Further research is required to understand the underlying reasons for this. The trial has been registered with ISRCTN-ISRCTN 70891354.

Project description:BackgroundThe Emergency Department (ED) is not always the optimal place for people with palliative care needs but is the most common route for treatment when urgent care is sought. The aim of this study,''REasons for PalLIative Care Admissions (REPLICA)' was to explore the perspectives of ED healthcare professionals of hospital admission or discharge via ED for palliative care patients.MethodsThis is a sequential mixed methods study comprising (i) quantitative descriptive analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) of palliative care patients (code Z51.5) who were admitted through ED in a West Midlands Hospital and for the rest of England; (ii) in-depth semi-structured interviews with 17 ED staff which were analysed using thematic content analysis.ResultsOver the four years (2013-2017), 430,116 people admitted through ED were identified with a Z51.5 diagnosis code, 0.6% (n = 2736) of whom were from the West Midlands Hospital. The most common reasons for palliative care patients' admission to hospitals across England were for care of chronic kidney disease, cancers and urinary tract infections. Five themes were elicited from the qualitative analysis: (1) Providing palliative care in ED is challenging, due to factors including lack of training in palliative care and the unsuitable environment. (2) Patients go to ED due to challenges in community management such as inappropriate referrals and no care plan in place. (3) Health system influences admission and discharge decisions, including bed availability and being unable to set up community services out-of-hours. (4) Discussion with patient about treatment and end of life care needs to be outside of ED whilst the patient is still well enough to express their wishes. (5) Improving services for patients with palliative care needs. Recommendations include short training sessions for ED staff and accessing palliative care professionals 24/7.ConclusionsA large number of palliative care patients visit ED and are admitted to hospital for care; there is an urgent need to prevent patients attending the hospital through the establishment of a coordinated and dedicated service to support palliative care patients in the community.

Project description:Background Interprofessional teams contribute to patient safety during clinical care. However, little is known about how interprofessional teams manage and cope with critical incidents in the emergency department (ED). Therefore, the study aimed to describe healthcare professionals (HCPs) perceptions of critical incidents linked to the enablers of and barriers to interprofessional teamwork in a high-risk setting, the ED. Methods Individual interviews with HCPs regarding events at the ED were held during the period of May 2019–January 2020. The Critical Incident Technique approach was used to guide the interviews and the qualitative analysis. Data were analyzed inductively using qualitative content analysis. Results Interview participants (n = 28) included 7 physicians (25%), 12 registered nurses (43%), 7 nurse assistants (25%) and 2 administrators (7%). Overall, 108 critical incidents were described. Eight categories that described functional and dysfunctional experiences within interprofessional teamwork were identified: salience of reflection; professional experience makes a difference; demanding physical and psychosocial work environment; balancing communication demands; lacking management support, structure, and planning; tensions between professional role and responsibility; different views on interprofessional teamwork; and confidence in interprofessional team members. Conclusion Findings of this study indicate that poor ED-specific communication and limited professional experience are essential factors in handling critical incidents related to interprofessional teamwork. An important aspect of critical incident management is the ergonomics of the physical work environment and how it enables interprofessional teamwork. This study emphasizes the factors enabling interprofessional teamwork to manage critical incidents in the complex working environment of the ED. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-01034-0.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a scoping review to identify and summarise the existing literature on interventions involving primary healthcare professionals to manage emergency department (ED) overcrowding.DesignA scoping review.Data sourcesA comprehensive database search of Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library (Wiley) and CINAHL (EBSCO) databases was conducted (inception until January 2020) using peer-reviewed search strategies, complemented by a search of grey literature sources.Eligibility criteriaInterventions and strategies involving primary healthcare professionals (PHCPs: general practitioners (GPs), nurse practitioners (NPs) or nurses with expanded role) to manage ED overcrowding.MethodsWe engaged and collaborated, with 13 patient partners during the design and conduct stages of this review. We conducted this review using the JBI guidelines. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. We conducted descriptive analysis of the included studies (frequencies and percentages).ResultsFrom 23 947 records identified, we included 268 studies published between 1981 and 2020. The majority (58%) of studies were conducted in North America and were predominantly cohort studies (42%). The reported interventions were either 'within ED' (48%) interventions (eg, PHCP-led ED triage or fast track) or 'outside ED' interventions (52%) (eg, after-hours GP clinic and GP cooperatives). PHCPs involved in the interventions were: GP (32%), NP (26%), nurses with expanded role (16%) and combinations of the PHCPs (42%). The 'within ED' and 'outside ED' interventions reported outcomes on patient flow and ED utilisation, respectively.ConclusionsWe identified many interventions involving PHCPs that predominantly reported a positive impact on ED utilisation/patient flow metrics. Future research needs to focus on conducting well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews to evaluate the effectiveness of specific interventions involving PHCPs to critically appraise and summarise evidence on this topic.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate geriatric education programs for emergency department (ED) professionals based on: content and teaching methods and learning outcome effects and factors promoting or hindering program implementation.DesignSystematic review.SettingED.ParticipantsPhysicians, nurses, and medical residents working in the ED.Methods and measurementFive major biomedical databases were searched for (quasi) experimental studies, published between 1990 and April 2018, evaluating geriatric education programs for ED professionals. Data were synthesized around study quality, learning participants, teaching content and methods, and Kirkpatrick learning outcomes.ResultsNine before-after studies were included. Learners were mostly ED residents and, to a smaller extent, ED nurses and physicians. Study quality was moderate, with the lowest scores on sampling and instrument validity. Programs varied from a 1-day workshop to a 2-year curriculum, mostly combining didactic lectures with active and experiential learning formats. Topics commonly addressed included managing: geriatric syndromes, trauma and falls, medication, atypical presentations, and care transitions. Statistically significant improvements were mostly found in learners' knowledge acquisition (six studies). Significant improvements were also found in single studies on: self-reported geriatric screening, documentation of geriatric care, and appropriate urinary catheter placement. Factors promoting program implementation included: solving competing educational demands and busy work schedules, embedding the program in preexisting curricula, and close collaboration between emergency and geriatric medicine faculties.ConclusionsVarious geriatric education programs improve the geriatric knowledge of ED professionals and seem to positively impact their clinical practice. However, more program evaluations with larger study samples, and use of valid and reliable outcome measures, are needed to provide robust evidence on the effectiveness of such programs. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1-8, 2019. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2402-2409, 2019.

Project description:We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients' emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers.We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient's allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N?=?125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N?=?125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient's satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later.Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01934322.

Project description:IntroductionClimate change is causing an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events, which disproportionately impact the health of vulnerable populations. Heatstroke, the most serious heat-related illness, is a medical emergency that causes multiorgan failure and death without intervention. Rapid recognition and aggressive early treatment are essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate current standards of care for the emergent management of heatstroke and propose an evidence-based algorithm to expedite care.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and key journals, and reviewed bibliographies. Original research articles, including case studies, were selected if they specifically addressed the recognition and management of heatstroke in any prehospital, emergency department (ED), or intensive care unit population. Reviewers evaluated study quality and abstracted information regarding demographics, scenario, management, and outcome.ResultsIn total, 63 articles met full inclusion criteria after full-text review and were included for analysis. Three key themes identified during the qualitative review process included recognition, rapid cooling, and supportive care. Rapid recognition and expedited external or internal cooling methods coupled with multidisciplinary management were associated with improved outcomes. Delays in care are associated with adverse outcomes. We found no current scalable ED alert process to expedite early goal-directed therapies.ConclusionGiven the increased risk of exposure to heat waves and the time-sensitivity of the condition, EDs and healthcare systems should adopt processes for rapid recognition and management of heatstroke. This study proposes an evidence-based prehospital and ED heat alert pathway to improve early diagnosis and resource mobilization. We also provide an evidence-based treatment pathway to facilitate efficient patient cooling. It is hoped that this protocol will improve care and help healthcare systems adapt to changing environmental conditions.

Dataset Information

A randomised trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of different emergency department healthcare professionals in soft tissue injury management.

Publications

A randomised trial comparing the clinical effectiveness of different emergency department healthcare professionals in soft tissue injury management.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets