High Discordance of Chest X-ray and CT for Detection of Pulmonary Opacities in ED Patients: Implications for Diagnosing Pneumonia

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic performance of chest x-ray (CXR) compared to computed tomography (CT) for detection of pulmonary opacities in adult emergency department (ED) patients. Methods We conducted an observational cross-sectional study of adult patients presenting to 12 EDs in the United States from July 1, 2003, through November 30, 2006, who underwent both CXR and chest CT for routine clinical care. CXRs and CT scans performed on the same patient were matched. CXRs and CT scans were interpreted by attending radiologists and classified as containing pulmonary opacities if the final radiologist report noted opacity, infiltrate, consolidation, pneumonia, or bronchopneumonia. Using CT as a criterion standard, the diagnostic test characteristics of CXR to detect pulmonary opacities were calculated. Results The study cohort included 3423 patients. Shortness of breath, chest pain and cough were the most common complaints, with 96.1% of subjects reporting at least one of these symptoms. Pulmonary opacities were visualized on 309 (9.0%) CXRs and 191 (5.6 %) CT scans. CXR test characteristics for detection of pulmonary opacities included: sensitivity 43.5% (95% CI, 36.4%-50.8%); specificity 93.0% (95% CI, 92.1%-93.9%); positive predictive value 26.9% (95% CI, 22.1%-32.2%); and negative predictive value 96.5% (95% CI, 95.8%-97.1%). Conclusion In this multicenter cohort of adult ED patients with acute cardiopulmonary symptoms, CXR demonstrated poor sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting pulmonary opacities. Reliance on CXR to identify pneumonia may lead to significant rates of misdiagnosis

Septic Arthritis of the Temporomandibular Joint: Case Reports and Review of the Literature

Septic arthritis of the temporomandibular (TM) joint is rare, but it is associated with high risk for significant morbidity

Potentially Avoidable Transfers of Veterans with Mental Health Conditions in the Veterans Health Administration

Objective: Over 40% of the 2.4 million emergency department (ED) visits to Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals are from veterans who live in rural areas, a population at increased risk of interfacility transfer. Veterans may undergo interfacility transfer to obtain emergent or urgent access to specialized health services, particularly mental health care. However, such transfers raise questions regarding appropriate use of resources, travel burdens for patients and families, and logistical challenges for ED staff and providers that may delay timely care. We sought to describe ED-based, interfacility transfer rates within the VHA and to estimate the proportion of potentially avoidable transfers (PAT) of patients with mental health conditions relative to other diseases. Methods: This observational cohort included all patients who were transferred from a VHA ED to another VHA hospital between 2012 and 2014. We extracted data from Clinical Data Warehouse administrative data. PAT was defined as discharge from the receiving ED without a procedure, or hospital length of stay at the receiving hospital ≤ 1 day without having a procedure performed. We conducted facility-level and diagnosis-level analysis to identify conditions for which an alternative to transfer, such as telehealth access to specialty care, could be developed and implemented in low-volume or rural EDs. Results: Of 6,131,734 ED visits during the three-year study period, 18,875 (0.3%) were transferred from one VHA ED to another VHA facility. Rural residents were transferred three times as often as urban residents (0.6% vs. 0.2%, p<0.001), and 23.6% of all VHA-to-VHA transfers met the PAT definition. Mental health conditions were the most common reason for interfacility transfer (34% of all interfacility transfers), followed by heart disease (12%). Of transfers that met PAT criteria, 11% were for mental health diagnoses whereas 21% were for heart disease. Geographic analysis suggested that overall PAT proportion ranged across regions from 8-53% with mental health PATs between 2-42%. Conclusion: VHA interfacility transfer is commonly performed for mental health diagnoses, and there is substantial regional variation in potentially avoidable transfers in a national sample of transfers. A significant proportion of these transfers may be potentially avoidable. Future work should focus on improving capabilities to provide specialty evaluation locally for these conditions, possibly using telehealth solutions. Additional work should also focus on measuring the timeliness of these transfers

Rural Interfacility Emergency Department Transfers: Framework and Qualitative Analysis

Introduction: Interfacility transfers from rural emergency departments (EDs) are an important means of access to timely and specialized care.Methods: Our goal was to identify and explore facilitators and barriers in transfer processes and their implications for emergency rural care and access. Semi-structured interviews with ED staff at five rural and two urban Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals were recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify themes and construct a conceptual framework.Results: From 81 interviews with clinical and administrative staff between March–June 2018, four themes in the interfacility transfer process emerged: 1) patient factors; 2) system resources; and 3) processes and communication for transfers, which culminate in 4) the location decision. Current and anticipated resource limitations were highly influential in transfer processes, which were described as burdensome and diverting resources from clinical care for emergency patients. Location decision was highly influenced by complexity of the transfer process, while perceived quality at the receiving location or patient preferences were not reported in interviews as being primary drivers of location decision. Transfers were described as burdensome for patients and their families. Finally, patients with mental health conditions epitomized challenges of emergency transfers.Conclusion: Interfacility transfers from rural EDs are multifaceted, resource-driven processes that require complex coordination. Anticipated resource needs and the transfer process itself are important determinants in the location decision, while quality of care or patient preferences were not reported as key determinants by interviewees. These findings identify potential benefits from tracking transfer boarding as an operational measure, directed feedback regarding outcomes of transferred patients, and simplified transfer processes