Dataset Information

Emergency department provider perspectives on elder abuse and development of a novel ED-based multidisciplinary intervention team.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:An ED visit provides a unique opportunity to identify elder abuse, which is common and has serious medical consequences. Despite this, emergency providers rarely recognise or report it. We have begun the design of an ED-based multidisciplinary consultation service to improve identification and provide comprehensive medical and forensic assessment and treatment for potential victims. METHODS:We qualitatively explored provider perspectives to inform intervention development. We conducted 15 semistructured focus groups with 101 providers, including emergency physicians, social workers, nurses, technologists, security, radiologists and psychiatrists at a large, urban academic medical centre. Focus groups were transcribed, and data were analysed to identify themes. RESULTS:Providers reported not routinely assessing for elder mistreatment and believed that they commonly missed it. They reported 10 reasons for this, including lack of knowledge or training, no time to conduct an evaluation, concern that identifying elder abuse would lead to additional work, and absence of a standardised response. Providers believed an ED-based consultation service would be frequently used and would increase identification, improve care and help ensure safety. They made 21 recommendations for a multidisciplinary team, including the importance of 24/7 availability, the value of a positive attitude in a consulting service and the importance of feedback to referring ED providers. Participants also highlighted that geriatric nurse practitioners may have ideal clinical and personal care training to contribute to the team. CONCLUSIONS:An ED-based multidisciplinary consultation service has potential to impact care for elder abuse victims. Insights from providers will inform intervention development.

SUBMITTER: Rosen T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6589031 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Emergency department provider perspectives on elder abuse and development of a novel ED-based multidisciplinary intervention team.

Rosen Tony T Stern Michael E ME Mulcare Mary R MR Elman Alyssa A McCarthy Thomas J TJ LoFaso Veronica M VM Bloemen Elizabeth M EM Clark Sunday S Sharma Rahul R Breckman Risa R Lachs Mark S MS

Emergency medicine journal : EMJ 20180809 10

<h4>Background</h4>An ED visit provides a unique opportunity to identify elder abuse, which is common and has serious medical consequences. Despite this, emergency providers rarely recognise or report it. We have begun the design of an ED-based multidisciplinary consultation service to improve identification and provide comprehensive medical and forensic assessment and treatment for potential victims.<h4>Methods</h4>We qualitatively explored provider perspectives to inform intervention developme ...[more]

PMID: 30093378

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To characterize assessments of a patient's ability to report elder abuse within the context of an emergency department (ED)-based screen for elder abuse. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study in which participants were screened for elder abuse and neglect. SETTING:Academic ED in the United States. PARTICIPANTS:Patients, aged 65?years and older, presenting to an ED for acute care were assessed by trained research assistants or nurses. MEASUREMENTS:All patients completed the four-item Abbreviated Mental Test 4 (AMT4), then completed a safety interview (using the Emergency Department Senior Abuse Identification tool) designed to detect multiple domains of elder abuse and received a physical examination. Based on the cognitive assessment and safety interview, assessors ranked their confidence in the patient's ability to report abuse as absolutely confident, confident, somewhat confident, or not confident. To assess interrater reliability, two assessors independently rated confidence for a subset of patients. RESULTS:Assessors suspected elder abuse in 18 of 276 patients (6.5%). Assessors were absolutely confident in the patient's ability to report abuse for 95.7% of patients, confident for 2.5%, somewhat confident for 1.5%, and not confident for 0.3%. Among patients with an AMT4?of 4 (n = 249), assessors were confident or absolutely confident in 100% of patients. Among patients with an AMT4?of less than 4 (n = 27), they were confident or absolutely confident in the patient's ability to report abuse for 81% of patients, including 11 of 12 patients with mild cognitive impairment and 7 of 11 patients with severe cognitive impairment. For patients receiving paired evaluations (n = 131), agreement between assessors regarding patient ability to report abuse was 97% (? = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS:In this sample of older adults receiving care in an ED, research assistants and nurses felt that the vast majority were able to report elder abuse, including many patients with cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:170-175, 2019.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Benzodiazepines and opioids are prescribed simultaneously (i.e., "coprescribed") in many clinical settings, despite guidelines advising against this practice and mounting evidence that concomitant use of both medications increases overdose risk. This study sought to characterize the contexts in which benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs and providers' reasons for coprescribing. METHODS:We conducted focus groups with emergency department (ED) providers (resident and attending physicians, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists) from three hospitals using semistructured interviews to elicit perspectives on benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed. We performed qualitative content analysis of the resulting transcripts using a consensual qualitative research approach, aiming to identify priority categories that describe the phenomenon of benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing. RESULTS:Participants acknowledged coprescribing rarely and reluctantly and often provided specific discharge instructions when coprescribing. The decision to coprescribe is multifactorial, often isolated to specific clinical and situational contexts (e.g., low back pain, failed solitary opioid therapy) and strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs about the efficacy of combination therapy. The decision to coprescribe is further influenced by a self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid hospital admission. When considering potential interventions to reduce the incidence of coprescribing, participants opposed computerized alerts but were supportive of a pharmacist-assisted intervention. Many providers found the process of participating in peer discussions on prescribing habits to be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS:In this qualitative study of ED providers, we found that benzodiazepine-opioid coprescribing occurs in specific clinical and situational contexts, such as the treatment of low back pain or failed solitary opioid therapy. The decision to coprescribe is strongly influenced by a provider's beliefs and by self-imposed pressure to escalate care or avoid admission.

Project description:Recent health policy changes have focused efforts on reducing emergency department (ED) visits as a way to reduce costs and improve quality of care. This was a systematic review of interventions based outside the ED aimed at reducing ED use.This study was designed as a systematic review. We reviewed the literature on interventions in five categories: patient education, creation of additional non-ED capacity, managed care, prehospital diversion, and patient financial incentives. Studies written in English, with interventions administered outside of the ED, and a comparison group where ED use was an outcome, were included. Two independent reviewers screened search results using MEDLINE, Cochrane, OAIster, or Scopus. The following data were abstracted from included studies: type of intervention, study design, population, details of intervention, effect on ED use, effect on non-ED health care use, and other health and financial outcomes. Quality of individual articles was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines.Of 39 included studies, 34 were observational and five were randomized controlled trials. Two of five studies on patient education found reductions in ED use ranging from 21% to 80%. Out of 10 studies of additional non-ED capacity, four showed decreases of 9% to 54%, and one a 21% increase. Both studies on prehospital diversion found reductions of 3% to 7%. Of 12 studies on managed care, 10 had decreases ranging from 1% to 46%. Nine out of 10 studies on patient financial incentives found decreases of 3% to 50%, and one a 34% increase. Nineteen studies reported effect on non-ED use with mixed results. Seventeen studies included data on health outcomes, but 13 of these only included data on hospitalizations rather than morbidity and mortality. Seven studies included data on cost outcomes. According to the GRADE guidelines, all studies had at least some risk of bias, with four moderate quality, one low quality, and 34 very low quality studies.Many studies have explored interventions based outside the ED to reduce ED use in various populations, with mixed evidence. Approximately two-thirds identified here showed reductions in ED use. The interventions with the greatest number of studies showing reductions in ED use include patient financial incentives and managed care, while the greatest magnitude of reductions were found in patient education. These findings have implications for insurers and policymakers seeking to reduce ED use.

Project description:ImportanceSuicide is a leading cause of deaths in the United States. Although the emergency department (ED) is an opportune setting for initiating suicide prevention efforts, ED-initiated suicide prevention interventions remain underdeveloped.ObjectiveTo determine whether an ED-initiated intervention reduces subsequent suicidal behavior.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter study of 8 EDs in the United States enrolled adults with a recent suicide attempt or ideation and was composed of 3 sequential phases: (1) a treatment as usual (TAU) phase from August 2010 to December 2011, (2) a universal screening (screening) phase from September 2011 to December 2012, and (3) a universal screening plus intervention (intervention) phase from July 2012 to November 2013.InterventionsScreening consisted of universal suicide risk screening. The intervention phase consisted of universal screening plus an intervention, which included secondary suicide risk screening by the ED physician, discharge resources, and post-ED telephone calls focused on reducing suicide risk.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was suicide attempts (nonfatal and fatal) over the 52-week follow-up period. The proportion and total number of attempts were analyzed.ResultsA total of 1376 participants were recruited, including 769 females (55.9%) with a median (interquartile range) age of 37 (26-47) years. A total of 288 participants (20.9%) made at least 1 suicide attempt, and there were 548 total suicide attempts among participants. There were no significant differences in risk reduction between the TAU and screening phases (23% vs 22%, respectively). However, compared with the TAU phase, patients in the intervention phase showed a 5% absolute reduction in suicide attempt risk (23% vs 18%), with a relative risk reduction of 20%. Participants in the intervention phase had 30% fewer total suicide attempts than participants in the TAU phase. Negative binomial regression analysis indicated that the participants in the intervention phase had significantly fewer total suicide attempts than participants in the TAU phase (incidence rate ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.00; P = .05) but no differences between the TAU and screening phases (incidence rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.71-1.41; P = .99).Conclusions and relevanceAmong at-risk patients in the ED, a combination of brief interventions administered both during and after the ED visit decreased post-ED suicidal behavior.

Project description:ImportanceDementia is often underdiagnosed in nursing homes (NHs). This potentially results in inappropriate care, and high rates of emergency department (ED) transfers in particular.ObjectiveTo assess whether systematic dementia screening of NH residents combined with multidisciplinary team meetings resulted in a lower rate of ED transfer at 12 months compared with usual care.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter, cluster randomized trial with NHs as the unit of randomization. The IDEM (Impact of Systematic Tracking of Dementia Cases on the Rate of Hospitalization in Emergency Care Units) trial took place at 64 public and private NHs in France. Recruitment started on May 1, 2010, and was completed on March 31, 2012. Residents who were aged 60 years or older, had no diagnosed or documented dementia, were not bedridden, had lived in the NH for at least 1 month at inclusion, and had a life expectancy greater than 12 months were included. The residents were followed up for 18 months. The main study analyses were completed on October 14, 2016.InterventionTwo parallel groups were compared: an intervention group consisting of NHs that set up 2 multidisciplinary team meetings to identify residents with dementia and to discuss an appropriate care plan, and a control group consisting of NHs that continued their usual practice. During the inclusion period of 23 months, all residents of participating NHs who met eligibility criteria were included in the study.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point (ED transfer) was analyzed at 12 months, but the residents included were followed up for 18 months.ResultsA total of 64 NHs participated in the study and enrolled 1428 residents (mean [SD] age, 84.7 [8.1] years; 1019 [71.3%] female): 599 in the intervention group (32 NHs) and 829 in the control group (32 NHs). The final study visit was completed by 1042 residents (73.0%). The main reason for early discontinuation was death (318 residents [22.7%]). The intervention did not reduce the risk of ED transfers during the 12-month follow-up: the proportion of residents transferred at least once to an ED during the 12-month follow-up was 16.2% in the intervention group vs 12.8% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.83-2.09; P = .24).Conclusions and relevanceThis study failed to demonstrate that systematic screening for dementia in NHs resulted in fewer ED transfers. The findings do not support implementation of multidisciplinary team meetings for systematic dementia screening of all NH residents, beyond the national recommendations for dementia diagnosis, to reduce ED transfers.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01569997.

Dataset Information

Emergency department provider perspectives on elder abuse and development of a novel ED-based multidisciplinary intervention team.

Publications

Emergency department provider perspectives on elder abuse and development of a novel ED-based multidisciplinary intervention team.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets