Dataset Information

Evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department (ENQuIRE): study protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Quality of emergency department (ED) care affects patient outcomes substantially. Quality indicators (QIs) for ED care are a major challenge due to the heterogeneity of patient populations, health care structures and processes in Germany. Although a number of quality measures are already in use, there is a paucity of data on the importance of these QIs on medium-term and long-term outcomes. The evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department study (ENQuIRE) aims to identify and investigate the relevance of QIs in the ED on patient outcomes in a 12-month follow-up. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The study is a prospective non-interventional multicentre cohort study conducted in 15 EDs throughout Germany. Included are all patients in 2019, who were ?18 years of age, insured at the Techniker Krankenkasse (statutory health insurance (SHI)) and gave their written informed consent to the study.The primary objective of the study is to assess the effect of selected quality measures on patient outcome. The data collected for this purpose comprise medical records from the ED treatment, discharge (claims) data from hospitalised patients, a patient questionnaire to be answered 6-8 weeks after emergency admission, and outcome measures in a 12-month follow-up obtained as claims data from the SHI.Descriptive and analytical statistics will be applied to provide summaries about the characteristics of QIs and associations between quality measures and patient outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Approval of the leading ethics committee at the Medical Faculty of the University of Magdeburg (reference number 163/18 from 19 November 2018) has been obtained and adapted by responsible local ethics committees.The findings of this work will be disseminated by publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts and presentations as conference contributions (abstracts, poster or oral presentations).Moreover, results will be discussed with clinical experts and medical associations before being proposed for implementation into the quality management of EDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00015203); Pre-results.

SUBMITTER: Drynda S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7500312 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department (ENQuIRE): study protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.

Drynda Susanne S Schindler Wencke W Slagman Anna A Pollmanns Johannes J Horenkamp-Sonntag Dirk D Schirrmeister Wiebke W Otto Ronny R Bienzeisler Jonas J Greiner Felix F Drösler Saskia S Lefering Rolf R Hitzek Jennifer J Möckel Martin M Röhrig Rainer R Swart Enno E Walcher Felix F

BMJ open 20200917 9

<h4>Introduction</h4>Quality of emergency department (ED) care affects patient outcomes substantially. Quality indicators (QIs) for ED care are a major challenge due to the heterogeneity of patient populations, health care structures and processes in Germany. Although a number of quality measures are already in use, there is a paucity of data on the importance of these QIs on medium-term and long-term outcomes. The evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department ...[more]

PMID: 32948571

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:A consensus study from 2017 developed 15 response-specific quality indicators (QIs) for physician-staffed emergency medical services (P-EMS). The aim of this study was to test these QIs for important characteristics in a real clinical setting. These characteristics were feasibility, rankability, variability, actionability and documentation. We further aimed to propose benchmarks for future quality measurements in P-EMS. DESIGN:In this prospective observational study, physician-staffed helicopter emergency services registered data for the 15 QIs. The feasibility of the QIs was assessed based on the comments of the recording physicians. The other four QI characteristics were assessed by the authors. Benchmarks were proposed based on the quartiles in the dataset. SETTING:Nordic physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical services. PARTICIPANTS:16 physician-staffed helicopter emergency services in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway. RESULTS:The dataset consists of 5638 requests to the participating P-EMSs. There were 2814 requests resulting in completed responses with patient contact. All QIs were feasible to obtain. The variability of 14 out of 15 QIs was adequate. Rankability was adequate for all QIs. Actionability was assessed as being adequate for 10 QIs. Documentation was adequate for 14 QIs. Benchmarks for all QIs were proposed. CONCLUSIONS:All 15 QIs seem possible to use in everyday quality measurement and improvement. However, it seems reasonable to not analyse the QI 'Adverse Events' with a strictly quantitative approach because of a low rate of adverse events. Rather, this QI should be used to identify adverse events so that they can be analysed as sentinel events. The actionability of the QIs 'Able to respond immediately when alarmed', 'Time to arrival of P-EMS', 'Time to preferred destination', 'Provision of advanced treatment' and 'Significant logistical contribution' was assessed as being poor. Benchmarks for the QIs and a total quality score are proposed for future quality measurements.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Older patients (≥65 years old) experience high rates of adverse outcomes after an emergency department (ED) visit. Reliable tools to predict adverse outcomes in this population are lacking. This manuscript comprises a study protocol for the Risk Stratification in the Emergency Department in Acutely Ill Older Patients (RISE UP) study that aims to identify predictors of adverse outcome (including triage- and risk stratification scores) and intends to design a feasible prediction model for older patients that can be used in the ED. METHODS:The RISE UP study is a prospective observational multicentre cohort study in older (≥65 years of age) ED patients treated by internists or gastroenterologists in Zuyderland Medical Centre and Maastricht University Medical Centre+ in the Netherlands. After obtaining informed consent, patients characteristics, vital signs, functional status and routine laboratory tests will be retrieved. In addition, disease perception questionnaires will be filled out by patients or their caregivers and clinical impression questionnaires by nurses and physicians. Moreover, both arterial and venous blood samples will be taken in order to determine additional biomarkers. The discriminatory value of triage- and risk stratification scores, clinical impression scores and laboratory tests will be evaluated. Univariable logistic regression will be used to identify predictors of adverse outcomes. With these data we intend to develop a clinical prediction model for 30-day mortality using multivariable logistic regression. This model will be validated in an external cohort. Our primary endpoint is 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary (composite) endpoint consist of 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay, admission to intensive- or medium care units, readmission and loss of independent living. Patients will be followed up for at least 30 days and, if possible, for one year. DISCUSSION:In this study, we will retrieve a broad range of data concerning adverse outcomes in older patients visiting the ED with medical problems. We intend to develop a clinical tool for identification of older patients at risk of adverse outcomes that is feasible for use in the ED, in order to improve clinical decision making and medical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02946398 ; 9/20/2016).

Project description:BackgroundIdentification of delirium in emergency departments (ED) is often underestimated; within EDs, studies on delirium assessment and relation with patient outcome in Intermediate Care Units (IMCU) appear missing in European hospital settings. Here we aimed to determine delirium prevalence in an EDIMCU (Hospital de Braga, Braga, Portugal) and assessed routine biochemical parameters that might be delirium indicators.MethodsThe study was prospective and observational. Sedation level was assessed via the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and delirium status by the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU. Information collected included age and gender, admission type, Charlson Comorbidity Index combined condition score (Charlson score), systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria (SIRS), biochemical parameters (blood concentration of urea nitrogen, creatinine, hemoglobin, sodium and potassium, arterial blood gases, and other parameters as needed depending on clinical diagnosis) and EDIMCU length of stay (LOS). Statistical analyses were performed as appropriate to determine if baseline features differed between the 'Delirium' and 'No Delirium' groups. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess the effect of delirium on the 1-month outcome.ResultsInclusion and exclusion criteria were met in 283 patients; 238 were evaluated at 1-month for outcome follow-up after EDIMCU discharge ("good" recovery without complications requiring hospitalization or institutionalization; "poor" institutionalization in permanent care-units/assisted-living or death). Delirium was diagnosed in 20.1% patients and was significantly associated with longer EDIMCU LOS. At admission, Delirium patients were significantly older and had significantly higher blood urea, creatinine and osmolarity levels and significantly lower hemoglobin levels, when compared with No Delirium patients. Delirium was an independent predictor of increased EDIMCU LOS (odds ratio 3.65, 95% CI 1.97-6.75) and poor outcome at 1-month after discharge (odds ratio 3.51, CI 1.84-6.70), adjusted for age, gender, admission type, presence of SIRS criteria, Charlson score and osmolarity at admission.ConclusionsIn an EDIMCU setting, delirium was associated with longer LOS and poor outcome at 1-month post-discharge. Altogether, findings support the need for delirium screening and management in emergency settings.

Project description:Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been shown to improve outcomes in hospitalised older adults; however, there is currently no compelling evidence to support CGA interventions within the Emergency Department (ED). The aim of this study is to explore the clinical and process outcomes of older adults who receive ED-CGA over a period of six months after their initial ED attendance. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: The STrengthening the Reporting of the OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) standardised reporting guidelines will be adhered to. Older adults aged ≥65 years who score ≥2 on the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) tool and present to the ED with a medical complaint during the operational hours of the dedicated interdisciplinary team, will be considered eligible for recruitment. Demographic and health assessment information will be obtained at the ED index attendance followed by completion of an interdisciplinary CGA. A dedicated research nurse will complete follow-up telephone interviews with participants at 30 days and six months. The primary outcome will be incidence of hospital admission from the ED index attendance. Secondary outcomes will include functional decline, patient satisfaction with the ED index attendance, unscheduled ED reattendance(s), unscheduled hospital (re)admission(s), nursing home admission(s), healthcare utilisation, and death. Descriptive statistics will be used to profile the characteristics of the study participants and multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis will be used to analyse risk of adverse outcomes. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by the University of Limerick Hospital Group Research Ethics Committee (107/2021). The authors will disseminate study findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at national and international conferences. Patient and public involvement will be sought from a panel of older adults at the Ageing Research Centre in the University of Limerick. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05252182.

Project description:Lung ultrasound (LUS) can help clinicians make a timely diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).ObjectivesTo assess if LUS can improve diagnosis and antibiotic initiation in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected CAP.DesignA prospective observational study.SettingsFour EDs.ParticipantsThe study included 150 patients older than 18 years with a clinical suspicion of CAP, of which 2 were subsequently excluded (incorrect identification), leaving 148 patients (70 women and 78 men, average age 72±18 years). Exclusion criteria included a life-threatening condition with do-not-resuscitate-order or patient requiring immediate intensive care.InterventionsAfter routine diagnostic procedure (clinical, radiological and laboratory tests), the attending emergency physician established a clinical CAP probability according to a four-level Likert scale (definite, probable, possible and excluded). An LUS was then performed, and another CAP probability was established based on the ultrasound result. An adjudication committee composed of three independent experts established the final CAP probability at hospital discharge.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary objective was to assess concordance rate of CAP diagnostic probabilities between routine diagnosis procedure or LUS and the final probability of the adjudication committee. Secondary objectives were to assess changes in CAP probability induced by LUS, and changes in antibiotic treatment initiation.ResultsOverall, 27% (95% CI 20 to 35) of the routine procedure CAP classifications and 77% (95% CI 71 to 84) of the LUS CAP classifications were concordant with the adjudication committee classifications. Cohen's kappa coefficients between routine diagnosis procedure and LUS, according to adjudication committee, were 0.07 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.11) and 0.61 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.66), respectively. The modified probabilities for the diagnosis of CAP after LUS resulted in changes in antibiotic prescriptions in 32% (95% CI 25 to 40) of the cases.ConclusionIn our study, LUS was a powerful tool to improve CAP diagnosis in the ED, reducing diagnostic uncertainty from 73% to 14%.Trial registration numberNCT03411824.

Project description:BackgroundInfectious gastroenteritis is common in the emergency department (ED). Patients infected with either Norovirus or toxigenic Clostridium difficile require special isolation procedures. The aims were to describe the aetiology of infectious gastroenteritis in the ED, evaluate whether current isolation procedures, based on clinical judgement are sufficient, and to identify information that might be used to identify patients requiring isolation.MethodsProspective, observational, multicentre study. We collected information on symptoms, vital signs, travel history, the recent use of antibiotics, and infectious contacts and tested faecal samples for Norovirus, C. difficile, and enteropathogenic bacteria.ResultsThe study enrolled 227 patients, of whom 163 (71%) delivered a faecal sample for Norovirus analysis (13% positive), 171 (74%) for C. difficile (13% positive), and 173 (76%) for enteropathogenic bacteria (16% positive). In total 71% of the patients were isolated using strict precautions, 29% of the isolated patient and 14% of the patients who were not isolated had had a highly contagious GE. Risk factors for Norovirus included frequent vomiting (OR 5.5), recent admission of another patient with Norovirus (OR 2.6), and a short duration of diarrhoea. Risk factors for C. difficile infections included older age (OR 6.0), longer duration of diarrhoea (OR 5.2), mucus in stool (OR 3.5), and previous antibiotic use (OR 23.4).ConclusionHighly contagious GE occurs in ¼ of the GE patients in the EDs, isolation based on clinical judgement is not very efficient. Several risk factors can predict the presence of Norovirus or toxigenic Clostridium difficile. It is uncertain whether this knowledge can improve isolation practices in ED settings.Trial registrationThis study was retrospectively registered in the Clinical Trials Data Base ( NCT02685527 ) and prospectively approved by the Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark (project ID S20140200) and Ethics Committee at the Medical Association of Schleswig-Holstein ["Ethikkommission bei der Ärztekammer Schleswig-Holstein", project ID 120/15(I)] and registered with the Danish Data Protection Agency (project ID nr. 2008-58-0035/ 1608).

Dataset Information

Evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department (ENQuIRE): study protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.

Publications

Evaluation of outcome relevance of quality indicators in the emergency department (ENQuIRE): study protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets