Violence Prevention in the Emergency Department: Future Research Priorities

The 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference working group session participants developed recommendations and research questions for violence prevention in the emergency department (ED). A writing group devised a working draft prior to the meeting and presented this to the breakout session at the consensus conference for input and approval. The recommendations include: 1) promote and facilitate the collection of standardized information related to violence victimization and perpetration in ED settings; 2) develop and validate brief practical screening instruments that can identify those at risk for perpetration of violence toward others or toward self; 3) develop and validate brief practical screening instruments that can identify victims at risk for violent reinjury and mental health sequelae; and 4) conduct efficacy, translational, and dissemination research on interventions for violence prevention. The work group emphasized the critical need and role of ED-based research to impact surveillance and prevention of future violence-related injury.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78605/1/j.1553-2712.2009.00544.x.pd

Will emergency and surgical patients participate in and complete alcohol interventions? A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the everyday surgical life, staff may experience that patients with Alcohol Use Disorders (AUDs) seem reluctant to participate in alcohol intervention programs. The objective was therefore to assess acceptance of screening and intervention as well as adherence to the intervention program among emergency department (ED) and surgical patients with AUDs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic literature search was followed by extraction of acceptance and adherence rates in ED and surgical patients. Numbers needed to screen (NNS) were calculated. Subgroup analyses were carried out based on different study characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The literature search revealed 33 relevant studies. Of these, 31 were randomized trials, 28 were conducted in EDs and 31 evaluated the effect of brief alcohol intervention. Follow-up was mainly conducted after six and/or twelve months.</p> <p>Four in five ED patients accepted alcohol screening and two in three accepted participation in intervention. In surgical patients, two in three accepted screening and the intervention acceptance rate was almost 100%. The adherence rate was above 60% for up to twelve months in both ED and surgical patients. The NNS to identify one eligible AUD patient and to get one eligible patient to accept participation in alcohol intervention varied from a few up to 70 patients.</p> <p>The rates did not differ between randomized and non-randomized trials, brief and intensive interventions or validated and self-reported alcohol consumption. Adherence rates were not affected by patients' group allocation and type of follow-up.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Most emergency and surgical patients with AUD accept participation in alcohol screening and interventions and complete the intervention program.</p

Automated telephone communication systems for preventive healthcare and management of long-term conditions

Background Automated telephone communication systems (ATCS) can deliver voice messages and collect health-related information from patients using either their telephone’s touch-tone keypad or voice recognition software. ATCS can supplement or replace telephone contact between health professionals and patients. There are four different types of ATCS: unidirectional (one-way, non-interactive voice communication), interactive voice response (IVR) systems, ATCS with additional functions such as access to an expert to request advice (ATCS Plus) and multimodal ATCS, where the calls are delivered as part of a multicomponent intervention. Objectives To assess the effects of ATCS for preventing disease and managing long-term conditions on behavioural change, clinical, process, cognitive, patient-centred and adverse outcomes. Search methods We searched 10 electronic databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Global Health; WHOLIS; LILACS; Web of Science; and ASSIA); three grey literature sources (Dissertation Abstracts, Index to Theses, Australasian Digital Theses); and two trial registries (www.controlled-trials.com; www.clinicaltrials.gov) for papers published between 1980 and June 2015. Selection criteria Randomised, cluster- and quasi-randomised trials, interrupted time series and controlled before-and-after studies comparing ATCS interventions, with any control or another ATCS type were eligible for inclusion. Studies in all settings, for all consumers/carers, in any preventive healthcare or long term condition management role were eligible. Data collection and analysis We used standard Cochrane methods to select and extract data and to appraise eligible studies. Main results We included 132 trials (N = 4,669,689). Studies spanned across several clinical areas, assessing many comparisons based on evaluation of different ATCS types and variable comparison groups. Forty-one studies evaluated ATCS for delivering preventive healthcare, 84 for managing long-term conditions, and seven studies for appointment reminders. We downgraded our certainty in the evidence primarily because of the risk of bias for many outcomes. We judged the risk of bias arising from allocation processes to be low for just over half the studies and unclear for the remainder. We considered most studies to be at unclear risk of performance or detection bias due to blinding, while only 16% of studies were at low risk. We generally judged the risk of bias due to missing data and selective outcome reporting to be unclear. For preventive healthcare, ATCS (ATCS Plus, IVR, unidirectional) probably increase immunisation uptake in children (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18 to 1.32; 5 studies, N = 10,454; moderate certainty) and to a lesser extent in adolescents (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; 2 studies, N = 5725; moderate certainty). The effects of ATCS in adults are unclear (RR 2.18, 95% CI 0.53 to 9.02; 2 studies, N = 1743; very low certainty). For screening, multimodal ATCS increase uptake of screening for breast cancer (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.55 to 3.04; 2 studies, N = 462; high certainty) and colorectal cancer (CRC) (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.88 to 2.55; 3 studies, N = 1013; high certainty) versus usual care. It may also increase osteoporosis screening. ATCS Plus interventions probably slightly increase cervical cancer screening (moderate certainty), but effects on osteoporosis screening are uncertain. IVR systems probably increase CRC screening at 6 months (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.48; 2 studies, N = 16,915; moderate certainty) but not at 9 to 12 months, with probably little or no effect of IVR (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99, 1.11; 2 studies, 2599 participants; moderate certainty) or unidirectional ATCS on breast cancer screening. Appointment reminders delivered through IVR or unidirectional ATCS may improve attendance rates compared with no calls (low certainty). For long-term management, medication or laboratory test adherence provided the most general evidence across conditions (25 studies, data not combined). Multimodal ATCS versus usual care showed conflicting effects (positive and uncertain) on medication adherence. ATCS Plus probably slightly (versus control; moderate certainty) or probably (versus usual care; moderate certainty) improves medication adherence but may have little effect on adherence to tests (versus control). IVR probably slightly improves medication adherence versus control (moderate certainty). Compared with usual care, IVR probably improves test adherence and slightly increases medication adherence up to six months but has little or no effect at longer time points (moderate certainty). Unidirectional ATCS, compared with control, may have little effect or slightly improve medication adherence (low certainty). The evidence suggested little or no consistent effect of any ATCS type on clinical outcomes (blood pressure control, blood lipids, asthma control, therapeutic coverage) related to adherence, but only a small number of studies contributed clinical outcome data. The above results focus on areas with the most general findings across conditions. In condition-specific areas, the effects of ATCS varied, including by the type of ATCS intervention in use. Multimodal ATCS probably decrease both cancer pain and chronic pain as well as depression (moderate certainty), but other ATCS types were less effective. Depending on the type of intervention, ATCS may have small effects on outcomes for physical activity, weight management, alcohol consumption, and diabetes mellitus. ATCS have little or no effect on outcomes related to heart failure, hypertension, mental health or smoking cessation, and there is insufficient evidence to determine their effects for preventing alcohol/ substance misuse or managing illicit drug addiction, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HIV/AIDS, hypercholesterolaemia, obstructive sleep apnoea, spinal cord dysfunction or psychological stress in carers. Only four trials (3%) reported adverse events, and it was unclear whether these were related to the intervention

Public health in Australasian emergency departments: Attitudes, barriers and current practices

Objective: To understand the attitudes of consultant emergency medicine physicians and advanced trainees and the perceived barriers to public health interventions in Australasian EDs. Methods: This was a voluntary cross-sectional, mixed-methods online survey of consultant emergency physicians and advanced trainees of the ACEM, conducted between December 2011 and March 2012. Results: Eight hundred and fifty-six ACEM members responded to the survey - a response rate of 33%. A similar number of consultants (70%) and trainees (75%) believed public health initiatives should be provided in the ED. Barriers identified by a similar majority of consultants and trainees to the implementation of public health interventions in EDs included dedicated time available for staff to be involved; available public health resources; available funding; clinical staff skills and expertise in public health; and the availability of staff training. Conclusions: Public health and health promotion are perceived by the majority of emergency medicine physicians as important in emergency medicine; however, substantial barriers exists to their implementation. Development of an evidence-based approach to public health interventions, which are effective and feasible in the ED environment, will facilitate a more comprehensive approach to public health initiatives in emergency medicine

The impact of screening, brief intervention and referral for treatment in emergency department patients\u27 alcohol use: a 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up

AIMS: This study aims to determine the impact of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral for Treatment (SBIRT) in reducing alcohol consumption in emergency department (ED) patients at 3, 6, and 12 months following exposure to the intervention. METHODS: Patients drinking above the low-risk limits (at-risk to dependence), as defined by National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), were recruited from 14 sites nationwide from April to August 2004. A quasi-experimental comparison group design included sequential recruitment of intervention and control patients at each site. Control patients received a written handout. The Intervention group received the handout and participated in a brief negotiated interview with direct referral for treatment if indicated. Follow-up surveys were conducted at 3, 6, and 12 months by telephone using an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system. RESULTS: Of the 1132 eligible patients consented and enrolled (581 control, 551 intervention), 699 (63%), 575 (52%) and 433 (38%) completed follow-up surveys via IVR at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Regression analysis adjusting for the clustered sampling design and using multiple imputation procedures to account for subject attrition revealed that those receiving SBIRT reported roughly three drinks less per week than controls (B = -3.00, SE = 1.06, P \u3c 0.05) and the level of maximum drinks per occasion was approximately three-fourths of a drink less than controls (B = -0.76, SE = 0.29, P \u3c 0.05) at 3 months. At 6 and 12 months post-intervention, these effects had weakened considerably and were no longer statistically or substantively significant. CONCLUSION: SBIRT delivered by ED providers appears to have short-term effectiveness in reducing at-risk drinking, but multi-contact interventions or booster programs may be necessary to maintain long-term reductions in risky drinking

Randomized Controlled Trial of Mailed Personalized Feedback for Risky Drinkers in the Emergency Department: The Impact on Alcohol Consumption, Alcohol-Related Injuries, and Repeat Emergency Department Presentations

Background: Due to the difficulty encountered in disseminating resource-intensive emergency department (ED)-based brief alcohol interventions into real-world settings, this study evaluated the effect of a mailed personalized feedback intervention for problem drinking ED patients. At 6-week follow-up, this intervention was associated with a statistically significant reduction in alcohol consumption among patients with alcohol-involved ED presentations. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of this intervention over time. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted among problem drinking ED patients, defined as those scoring 8 or more on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Participants in the intervention group received mailed personalized feedback regarding their alcohol consumption. The control group received no feedback. Follow-up interviews were conducted over the phone, postal survey, or email survey 6 weeks and 6 months after baseline screening, and repeat ED presentations over 12-month follow-up were ascertained via linked ED records. Results: Six-month follow-up interviews were completed with 210 participants (69%), and linked ED records were obtained for 286 participants (94%). The intervention had no effect on alcohol consumption, while findings regarding alcohol-related injuries and repeat ED presentations remain inconclusive. Conclusions: Further research in which the receipt of feedback is improved and a booster intervention is provided is recommended