Effects of process changes on emergency department crowding in a changing world:an interrupted time-series analysis

Background: During a 6-year period, several process changes were introduced at the emergency department (ED) to decrease crowding, such as the implementation of a general practitioner cooperative (GPC) and additional medical staff during peak hours. In this study, we assessed the effects of these process changes on three crowding measures: patients’ length of stay (LOS), the modified National ED OverCrowding Score (mNEDOCS), and exit block while taking into account changing external circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and centralization of acute care. Methods: We determined time points of the various interventions and external circumstances and built an interrupted time-series (ITS) model per outcome measure. We analyzed changes in level and trend before and after the selected time points using ARIMA modeling, to account for autocorrelation in the outcome measures. Results: Longer patients’ ED LOS was associated with more inpatient admissions and more urgent patients. The mNEDOCS decreased with the integration of the GPC and the expansion of the ED to 34 beds and increased with the closure of a neighboring ED and ICU. More exit blocks occurred when more patients with shortness of breath and more patients &gt; 70 years of age presented to the ED. During the severe influenza wave of 2018–2019, patients’ ED LOS and the number of exit blocks increased. Conclusions: In the ongoing battle against ED crowding, it is pivotal to understand the effect of interventions, corrected for changing circumstances and patient and visit characteristics. In our ED, interventions which were associated with decreased crowding measures included the expansion of the ED with more beds and the integration of the GPC on the ED.</p

Association between Covid-19 surge and emergency department patient flow and experience

Background: Preparations for Covid-19 in the Netherlands included hospital reconfigurations to increase capacity for the expected surge at the emergency department (ED). We describe patients’ ED length of stay (LOS), crowding and experiences of patients with respiratory complaints during the first Covid-19 peak. Methods: Retrospective analysis of demand, ED LOS, crowding, and a patient experience survey during a 12-week period in 2020 and similar periods in 2018 and 2019. Crowding levels were calculated using the National ED OverCrowding Scale. Results: The number of patients with respiratory complaints increased significantly, while total ED numbers were unchanged. Although presentation during the Covid-19 peak and needing hospital admission were associated with a longer ED LOS in patients with respiratory complaints, significantly less crowding occurred compared with the 2018 and 2019 periods. Increased ED LOS was associated with lower patient experience scores. Conclusion: Advanced warning and its associated preparation within the hospital and the community prevented significant delays in ED throughput during the first Covid-19 peak.</p

Effects of process changes on emergency department crowding in a changing world: an interrupted time-series analysis

Background: During a 6-year period, several process changes were introduced at the emergency department (ED) to decrease crowding, such as the implementation of a general practitioner cooperative (GPC) and additional medical staff during peak hours. In this study, we assessed the effects of these process changes on three crowding measures: patients’ length of stay (LOS), the modified National ED OverCrowding Score (mNEDOCS), and exit block while taking into account changing external circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and centralization of acute care. Methods: We determined time points of the various interventions and external circumstances and built an interrupted time-series (ITS) model per outcome measure. We analyzed changes in level and trend before and after the selected time points using ARIMA modeling, to account for autocorrelation in the outcome measures. Results: Longer patients’ ED LOS was associated with more inpatient admissions and more urgent patients. The mNEDOCS decreased with the integration of the GPC and the expansion of the ED to 34 beds and increased with the closure of a neighboring ED and ICU. More exit blocks occurred when more patients with shortness of breath and more patients > 70 years of age presented to the ED. During the severe influenza wave of 2018–2019, patients’ ED LOS and the number of exit blocks increased. Conclusions: In the ongoing battle against ED crowding, it is pivotal to understand the effect of interventions, corrected for changing circumstances and patient and visit characteristics. In our ED, interventions which were associated with decreased crowding measures included the expansion of the ED with more beds and the integration of the GPC on the ED

Non-sterile gloves and dressing versus sterile gloves, dressings and drapes for suturing of traumatic wounds in the emergency department: A non-inferiority multicentre randomised controlled trial

Background Patients with traumatic wounds frequently present to the ED. Literature on whether to treat these wounds sterile or non-sterile is sparse. Non-sterile treatment has the advantage of saving resources and costs, and could be of value in health settings where sterile materials are not readily available. Our objective was to compare the rate of wound infection after suturing traumatic lacerations with non-sterile gloves and dressings versus sterile gloves, dressings and drapes in the ED. We hypothesised that non-sterile gloves and dressings would be non-inferior to sterile gloves, dressings and drapes. The non-inferiority margin was set at 2%. Methods A multicentre single-blinded randomised controlled trial testing for non-inferiority of non-sterile gloves and dressings versus sterile gloves, dressings and drapes for suturing of traumatic wounds was performed in 3 EDs in The Netherlands. Adults with uncomplicated wounds were included from July 2012 to December 2016. At the time of treatment, patient and wound characteristics and management were documented. The outcome was wound infection, which was identified during follow-up in the treating ED at 5-14 days postprocedure. Results From 2468 eligible patients, 1480 were randomised in a sterile (n=747) or non-sterile (n=733) protocol. Baseline characteristics were similar in both study arms. The observed wound infection rate in the non-sterile group was 5.7% (95% CI 4.0% to 7.5%) vs 6.8% (95% CI 5.1% to 8.8%) in the sterile group. The mean difference of the wound infection rate of the two groups was-1.1% (95% CI-3.7% to 1.5%). Conclusion Although recruitment ceased prior to reaching our planned sample size, the findings suggest that there is unlikely to be a large difference between the non-sterile gloves and dressings for suturing of traumatic wounds and sterile gloves, dressings and drapes for suturing of traumatic wounds in the ED. Trial registration number NL 34798.078.11, NTR3541

The impact of a multimodal intervention on emergency department crowding and patient flow

Objective: The objective of this study is to assess the impact of a multimodal intervention on emergency department (ED) crowding and patient flow in a Dutch level 1 trauma center. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we compare ED crowding and patient flow between a 9-month pre-intervention period and a 9-month intervention period, during peak hours and overall (24/7). The multimodal intervention included (1) adding an emergency nurse practitioner (ENP) and (2) five medical specialists during peak hours to the 24/7 available emergency physicians (EPs), (3) a Lean programme to improve radiology turnaround times, and (4) extending the admission offices' openings hours. Crowding is measured with the modified National ED OverCrowding Score (mNEDOCS). Furthermore, radiology turnaround times, patients' length of stay (LOS), proportion of patients leaving without being seen (LWBS) by a medical provider, and unscheduled representations are assessed. Results: The number of ED visits were grossly similar in the two periods during peak hours (15,558 ED visits in the pre-intervention period and 15,550 in the intervention period) and overall (31,891 ED visits in the pre-intervention period vs. 32,121 in the intervention period). During peak hours, ED crowding fell from 18.6% (pre-intervention period) to 3.5% (intervention period), radiology turnaround times decreased from an average of 91 min (interquartile range 45-256 min) to 50 min (IQR 30-106 min., p < 0.001) and LOS reduced with 13 min per patient from 167 to 154 min (p < 0.001). For surgery, neurology and cardiology patients, LOS reduced significantly (with 17 min, 25 min, and 8 min. respectively), while not changing for internal medicine patients. Overall, crowding, radiology turnaround times and LOS also decreased. Less patients LWBS in the intervention period (270 patients vs. 348 patients, p < 0.001) and less patients represented unscheduled within 1 week after the initial ED visit: 864 (2.7%) in the pre-intervention period vs. 645 (2.0%) patients in the intervention period, p < 0.001. Conclusions: In this hospital, a multimodal intervention successfully reduces crowding, radiology turnaround times, patients' LOS, number of patients LWBS and the number of unscheduled return visits, suggesting improved ED processes. Further research is required on total costs of care and long-term effects