Dataset Information

Purpose, Pleasure, Pace and Contrasting Perspectives: Teaching and Learning in the Emergency Department.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Teaching and learning in the clinical setting are vital for the training and development of emergency physicians. Increasing service provision and time pressures in the emergency department (ED) have led to junior trainees' perceptions of a lack of teaching and a lack of support during clinical shifts. We sought to explore the perceptions of learners and supervisors in our ED regarding teaching within this diverse and challenging context.

Methods

Nine ED physicians and eight ED trainees were interviewed to explore perceptions of teaching in the ED. Clinical teaching was described as "on-the-floor" teaching during work shifts. We used a validated clinical teaching assessment instrument to help pilot and develop some of our interview questions, and data were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis.

Results

We identified three major themes in our study: 1) the strong sense of purpose and the pleasure gained through teaching and learning interactions, despite both groups being unsure of each other's engagement and enthusiasm; 2) contrasting perspectives of teaching with registrars holding a traditional knowledge transmission view, yet shared perspectives of teacher as being ED consultants; and 3) the effect of patient acuity and volume, which both facilitated learning until a critical point of busyness beyond which service provision pressures and staffing limitations were perceived to negatively impact learning.

Conclusions

The ED is a complex and fluid working and learning environment. We need to develop a shared understanding of teaching and learning opportunities in the ED, which helps all stakeholders move beyond learning as knowledge acquisition and sees the potential for learning from teachers of a multitude of professional backgrounds.

SUBMITTER: Sadka N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7995923 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEmergency department (ED) visits show a high volatility over time. Therefore, EDs are likely to be crowded at peak-volume moments. ED crowding is a widely reported problem with negative consequences for patients as well as staff. Previous studies on the predictive value of weather variables on ED visits show conflicting results. Also, no such studies were performed in the Netherlands. Therefore, we evaluated prediction models for the number of ED visits in our large the Netherlands teaching hospital based on calendar and weather variables as potential predictors.MethodsData on all ED visits from June 2016 until December 31, 2019, were extracted. The 2016-2018 data were used as training set, the 2019 data as test set. Weather data were extracted from three publicly available datasets from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute. Weather observations in proximity of the hospital were used to predict the weather in the hospital's catchment area by applying the inverse distance weighting interpolation method. The predictability of daily ED visits was examined by creating linear prediction models using stepwise selection; the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) was used as measurement of fit.ResultsThe number of daily ED visits shows a positive time trend and a large impact of calendar events (higher on Mondays and Fridays, lower on Saturdays and Sundays, higher at special times such as carnival, lower in holidays falling on Monday through Saturday, and summer vacation). The weather itself was a better predictor than weather volatility, but only showed a small effect; the calendar-only prediction model had very similar coefficients to the calendar+weather model for the days of the week, time trend, and special time periods (both MAPE's were 8.7%).ConclusionsBecause of this similar performance, and the inaccuracy caused by weather forecasts, we decided the calendar-only model would be most useful in our hospital; it can probably be transferred for use in EDs of the same size and in a similar region. However, the variability in ED visits is considerable. Therefore, one should always anticipate potential unforeseen spikes and dips in ED visits that are not shown by the model.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Clinical governance (CG) is among the different frameworks proposed to improve the quality of healthcare. Iran, like many other countries, has put healthcare quality improvement in its top health policy priorities. In November 2009, implementation of CG became a task for all hospitals across the country. However, it has been a challenge to clarify the notion of CG and the way to implement it in Iran. The purpose of this action research study is to understand how CG can be defined and implemented in a selected teaching emergency department (ED). METHODS/DESIGN: We will use Soft Systems Methodology for both designing the study and inquiring into its content. As we considered a complex problem situation regarding the quality of care in the selected ED, we initially conceptualized CG as a cyclic set of purposeful activities designed to explore the situation and find relevant changes to improve the quality of care. Then, implementation of CG will conceptually be to carry out that set of purposeful activities. The activities will be about: understanding the situation and finding out relevant issues concerning the quality of care; exploring different stakeholders' views and ideas about the situation and how it can be improved; and defining actions to improve the quality of care through structured debates and development of accommodations among stakeholders. We will flexibly use qualitative methods of data collection and analysis in the course of the study. To ensure the study rigor, we will use different strategies. DISCUSSION: Successful implementation of CG, like other quality improvement frameworks, requires special consideration of underlying complexities. We believe that addressing the complex situation and reflections on involvement in this action research will make it possible to understand the concept of CG and its implementation in the selected setting. By describing the context and executed flexible methods of implementation, the results of this study would contribute to the development of implementation science and be employed by boards and executives governing other clinical settings to facilitate CG implementation.

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:To characterize the signs and symptoms of sepsis, compare them with those from simple infection and other emergent conditions and evaluate their association with hospital outcomes.Design setting participants and interventionA multicenter, retrospective cohort study of 408,377 patients hospitalized through the emergency department from 2012 to 2017 with sepsis, suspected infection, heart failure, or stroke. Infected patients were identified based on Sepsis-3 criteria, whereas noninfected patients were identified through diagnosis codes.Measurements and main resultsSigns and symptoms were identified within physician clinical documentation in the first 24 hours of hospitalization using natural language processing. The time of sign and symptom onset prior to presentation was quantified, and sign and symptom prevalence was assessed. Using multivariable logistic regression, the association of each sign and symptom with four outcomes was evaluated: sepsis versus suspected infection diagnosis, hospital mortality, ICU admission, and time of first antibiotics (> 3 vs ≤ 3 hr from presentation). A total of 10,825 signs and symptoms were identified in 6,148,348 clinical documentation fragments. The most common symptoms overall were as follows: dyspnea (35.2%), weakness (27.2%), altered mental status (24.3%), pain (23.9%), cough (19.7%), edema (17.8%), nausea (16.9%), hypertension (15.6%), fever (13.9%), and chest pain (12.1%). Compared with predominant signs and symptoms in heart failure and stroke, those present in infection were heterogeneous. Signs and symptoms indicative of neurologic dysfunction, significant respiratory conditions, and hypotension were strongly associated with sepsis diagnosis, hospital mortality, and intensive care. Fever, present in only a minority of patients, was associated with improved mortality (odds ratio, 0.67, 95% CI, 0.64-0.70; p < 0.001). For common symptoms, the peak time of symptom onset before sepsis was 2 days, except for altered mental status, which peaked at 1 day prior to presentation.ConclusionsThe clinical presentation of sepsis was heterogeneous and occurred with rapid onset prior to hospital presentation. These findings have important implications for improving public education, clinical treatment, and quality measures of sepsis care.

Project description:IntroductionFirearm injury prevention discussions with emergency department (ED) patients provide a unique opportunity to prevent death and injury in high-risk patient groups. Building mutual understanding of safe firearm practices between patients and providers will aid the development of effective interventions. Examining ED patient baseline characteristics, perspectives on healthcare-based safety discussions, and experience with and access to firearms, will allow practitioners to craft more effective messaging and interventions.MethodsUsing an institutional review board-approved cross-sectional survey modified from a validated national instrument, we recruited 625 patients from three large, urban, academically affiliated EDs in the South to assess patient baseline characteristics, perspectives regarding firearms and firearm safety discussions, and prior violence history, as well as firearm access and safety habits. We compared the degree to which patients were open to discussions regarding firearms across a variety of provider types and clinical scenarios between those with and without gun access.ResultsOf the 625 patients consented and eligible for the study, 306 had access to firearms. The patients with firearm access were predominantly male, were more likely to have military experience, live in an urban or suburban region, and have experienced prior violence when compared to those without firearm access. Patients with and without gun access view firearm safety discussions with their healthcare provider as acceptable and analogous to other behavioral health interventions (i.e., helmet/seat belt use, alcohol/cigarette use). Patients were also accepting of these firearm safety discussions in many clinical contexts and led by multiple provider types. Of the patients with gun access, storage of each type of firearm was reviewed and the primary reason for ownership was for personal protection across all firearm types.ConclusionPatients in the ED indicate openness to firearm safety discussions delivered by a variety of providers and in diverse clinical scenarios. Healthcare providers engaging firearm owners in appropriate risk-benefit discussions using a trauma-informed approach is a critical next step in research and intervention.

Project description:BackgroundEmergency departments (EDs) are important venues for the distribution of naloxone to patients at high risk of opioid overdose, but less is known about patient perceptions on naloxone or best practices for patient education and communication. Our aim was to conduct an in-depth exploration of knowledge and attitudes toward ED naloxone distribution among patients who received a naloxone prescription.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 25 adult participants seen and discharged from three urban, academic EDs in Philadelphia, PA, with a naloxone prescription between November 2020 and February 2021. Interviews focused on awareness of naloxone as well as attitudes and experiences receiving naloxone in the ED. We used thematic content analysis to identify key themes reflecting patient attitudes and experiences.ResultsOf the 25 participants, 72% had previously witnessed an overdose and 48% had personally experienced a non-fatal overdose. Nineteen participants (76%) self-disclosed a history of substance use or overdose, and one reported receiving an opioid prescription during their ED visit and no history of substance use. In interviews, we identified wide variability in participant levels of knowledge about overdose risk, the role of naloxone in reducing risk, and naloxone access. A subset of participants was highly engaged with community harm reduction resources and well versed in naloxone access and use. A second subset was familiar with naloxone, but largely obtained it through healthcare settings such as the ED, while a final group was largely unfamiliar with naloxone. While most participants expressed positive attitudes about receiving naloxone from the ED, the quality of discussions with ED providers was variable, with some participants not even aware they were receiving a naloxone prescription until discharge.ConclusionsNaloxone prescribing in the ED was acceptable and valued by most participants, but there are missed opportunities for communication and education. These findings underscore the critical role that EDs play in mitigating risks for patients who are not engaged with other healthcare or community health providers and can inform future work about the effective implementation of harm reduction strategies in ED settings.

Project description:ObjectiveTo predict hospital admission at the time of ED triage using patient history in addition to information collected at triage.MethodsThis retrospective study included all adult ED visits between March 2014 and July 2017 from one academic and two community emergency rooms that resulted in either admission or discharge. A total of 972 variables were extracted per patient visit. Samples were randomly partitioned into training (80%), validation (10%), and test (10%) sets. We trained a series of nine binary classifiers using logistic regression (LR), gradient boosting (XGBoost), and deep neural networks (DNN) on three dataset types: one using only triage information, one using only patient history, and one using the full set of variables. Next, we tested the potential benefit of additional training samples by training models on increasing fractions of our data. Lastly, variables of importance were identified using information gain as a metric to create a low-dimensional model.ResultsA total of 560,486 patient visits were included in the study, with an overall admission risk of 29.7%. Models trained on triage information yielded a test AUC of 0.87 for LR (95% CI 0.86-0.87), 0.87 for XGBoost (95% CI 0.87-0.88) and 0.87 for DNN (95% CI 0.87-0.88). Models trained on patient history yielded an AUC of 0.86 for LR (95% CI 0.86-0.87), 0.87 for XGBoost (95% CI 0.87-0.87) and 0.87 for DNN (95% CI 0.87-0.88). Models trained on the full set of variables yielded an AUC of 0.91 for LR (95% CI 0.91-0.91), 0.92 for XGBoost (95% CI 0.92-0.93) and 0.92 for DNN (95% CI 0.92-0.92). All algorithms reached maximum performance at 50% of the training set or less. A low-dimensional XGBoost model built on ESI level, outpatient medication counts, demographics, and hospital usage statistics yielded an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI 0.91-0.91).ConclusionMachine learning can robustly predict hospital admission using triage information and patient history. The addition of historical information improves predictive performance significantly compared to using triage information alone, highlighting the need to incorporate these variables into prediction models.