Diagnostic Discrepancies in the Emergency Department:A Retrospective Study

Objectives: Diagnostic errors contribute substantially to preventable medical errors. Especially, the emergency department (ED) is a high-risk environment. Previous research showed that in 15%-30% of the ED patients, there is a difference between the primary diagnosis assigned by the emergency physician and the discharge diagnosis. This study aimed to determine the number and types of diagnostic discrepancies and to explore factors predicting discrepancies. Methods: A retrospective record review was conducted in an academic medical center. The primary diagnosis assigned in the ED was compared with the discharge diagnosis after hospital admission. For each patient, we gathered additional information about the diagnostic process to identify possible predictors of diagnostic discrepancies. Results: The electronic health records of 200 patients were reviewed. The primary diagnosis assigned in the ED was substantially different from the discharge diagnosis in 16.0%. These diagnostic discrepancies were associated with a higher number of additional diagnostics applied for (2.4 versus 2.0 diagnostics; P = 0.002) and longer stay in the ED (5.9 versus 4.7 hours; P = 0.008). Conclusions: A difference between the diagnosis assigned by the emergency physician and the discharge diagnosis was found in almost 1 in 6 patients. The increased number of additional diagnostics and the longer stay at the ED in the group of patients with a diagnostic discrepancy suggests that these cases reflect the more difficult cases. More research should be done on predictive factors of diagnostic discrepancies.</p

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department:Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population

Undetectable High-Sensitivity Troponin T as a Gatekeeper for Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in Patients Suspected of Acute Coronary Syndrome

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to characterize the safety and efficiency of a strategy employing the limit of detection (LoD) of high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-TnT) as a gatekeeper for coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) in suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We included suspected ACS patients who underwent CCTA and were evaluated with hs-TnT. Patients were categorized as below the LoD and at or above the LoD. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause mortality, ACS, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 177 patients (mean age 55 ± 10 years, 50.3% women), and 16 (9.0%) patients reached the primary outcome. None of the patients died, while 13 had an adjudicated diagnosis of ACS, and 3 underwent elective coronary revascularization. There were 77 patients (44%) with an hs-TnT value below the LoD (MACEs; n = 1 [1.3%]) and 100 (56%) with at or above the LoD levels (MACEs; n = 15 [15%]). None of 67 patients with an hs-TnT value below the LoD and <50% stenosis on CCTA experienced MACEs. Out of the 10 patients with an hs-TnT value below the LoD and ≥50% stenosis on CCTA, 1 patient underwent elective percutaneous coronary revascularization. In patients with an hs-TnT value at or above the LoD, 74 patients had <50% stenosis on CCTA, and 2 patients (3%) were diagnosed with myocardial infarction without obstructive coronary artery disease confirmed on invasive angiography. Thirteen (50%) patients with an hs-TnT value at or above the LoD and ≥50% stenosis on CCTA experienced MACEs (11 ACS and 2 elective percutaneous coronary revascularizations). CONCLUSION: Our findings support that implementing the LoD of hs-TnT as a gatekeeper may reduce the need for CCTA in suspected ACS patients in the ED

The Frequency and Predictive Factors of Change in Alcohol Consumption during the COVID-19 Pandemic:Results from a Multi-Country Longitudinal Study

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had multiple health and behavioral effects in the general population worldwide, including effects on nutritional and lifestyle behavior such as alcohol consumption. This study aimed to determine the frequency of and predictors for change in alcohol consumption two years after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic among participants from the general population of six countries. Methods: Longitudinal study design with 4999 participants (47% male; aged 18–75 years) from a general population cohort from six countries: Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (US). Measurements: Three web-based surveys at different time waves: T1 = 22 April–1 June 2020; T2 = 2 May–29 June 2021 and T3 = 29 April–25 June 2022. The surveys included questions on self-reported retrospective alcohol consumption, demographics, health, anxiety and depression symptoms and recent life events.Results: Of 4999 respondents, most (82.3%) reported no change in drinking habits during the pandemic, whereas 12.5% reported drinking less and 5.1% drinking more. Predictive factors for increased alcohol consumption include age 35–54 years, male gender, high educational level, moderate-severe depression symptoms, excessive drinking before the COVID-19 pandemic, no change in general health status and job loss. Predictive factors for decreased alcohol consumption were age 18–34 years, male gender, having chronic disease(s), moderate-severe depression symptoms, excessive drinking before the pandemic and job loss. Conclusion: The proportion of participants who reported a decrease in alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher compared to those who reported an increase. Excessive drinking before the pandemic, depression symptoms and job loss were predictors for both drinking more and drinking less alcohol during the COVID-19 pandemic with an stronger association for an increase in alcohol consumption.</p

Association between stringency of lockdown measures and emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic:A Dutch multicentre study

Introduction The COVID-19 outbreak disrupted regular health care, including the Emergency Department (ED), and resulted in insufficient ICU capacity. Lockdown measures were taken to prevent disease spread and hospital overcrowding. Little is known about the relationship of stringency of lockdown measures on ED utilization. Objective This study aimed to compare the frequency and characteristics of ED visits during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 to 2019, and their relation to stringency of lockdown measures. Material and methods A retrospective multicentre study among five Dutch hospitals was performed. The primary outcome was the absolute number of ED visits (year 2018 and 2019 compared to 2020). Secondary outcomes were age, sex, triage category, way of transportation, referral, disposition, and treating medical specialty. The relation between stringency of lockdown measures, measured with the Oxford Stringency Index (OSI) and number and characteristics of ED visits was analysed. Results The total number of ED visits in the five hospitals in 2019 was 165,894, whereas the total number of visits in 2020 was 135,762, which was a decrease of 18.2% (range per hospital: 10.5%-30.7%). The reduction in ED visits was greater during periods of high stringency lockdown measures, as indicated by OSI. Conclusion The number of ED visits in the Netherlands has significantly dropped during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a clear association between decreasing ED visits and increasing lockdown measures. The OSI could be used as an indicator in the management of ED visits during a future pandemic.</p

Association between stringency of lockdown measures and emergency department visits during the COVID-19 pandemic:A Dutch multicentre study

Introduction The COVID-19 outbreak disrupted regular health care, including the Emergency Department (ED), and resulted in insufficient ICU capacity. Lockdown measures were taken to prevent disease spread and hospital overcrowding. Little is known about the relationship of stringency of lockdown measures on ED utilization. Objective This study aimed to compare the frequency and characteristics of ED visits during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 to 2019, and their relation to stringency of lockdown measures. Material and methods A retrospective multicentre study among five Dutch hospitals was performed. The primary outcome was the absolute number of ED visits (year 2018 and 2019 compared to 2020). Secondary outcomes were age, sex, triage category, way of transportation, referral, disposition, and treating medical specialty. The relation between stringency of lockdown measures, measured with the Oxford Stringency Index (OSI) and number and characteristics of ED visits was analysed. Results The total number of ED visits in the five hospitals in 2019 was 165,894, whereas the total number of visits in 2020 was 135,762, which was a decrease of 18.2% (range per hospital: 10.5%-30.7%). The reduction in ED visits was greater during periods of high stringency lockdown measures, as indicated by OSI. Conclusion The number of ED visits in the Netherlands has significantly dropped during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a clear association between decreasing ED visits and increasing lockdown measures. The OSI could be used as an indicator in the management of ED visits during a future pandemic.</p

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population

Patient satisfaction, needs, and preferences concerning information dispensation at the emergency department: a cross-sectional observational study

Background: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of emergency care quality and has been associated with information dispensation at the emergency department (ED). Optimal information dispensation could improve patient experience and expectations. Knowing what kind of information patients want to receive and the preferred way of information dispensation are essential to optimize information delivery at the ED. The purpose of this cross-sectional observational study was to evaluate patient satisfaction concerning information dispensation (including general, medical, and practical information), the need for additional information, and preferences with regard to the way of information dispensation at the ED of a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Results: Four hundred twenty-three patients (patients ≥ 18 years with Glasgow Coma Scale 15) were enrolled (response rate 79%). The median patient satisfaction score concerning the overall information dispensation at the ED was 7.5 on a rating scale 0–10. Shorter length of ED stay was associated with higher patient satisfaction in multivariate analysis (P < 0.001). The majority of respondents were satisfied regarding medical (n = 328; 78%) and general information (n = 233; 55%). Patients were less satisfied regarding practical information (n = 180; 43%). Respondents who indicated that they received general, medical and practical information were significantly more often satisfied compared to patients who did not receive this information (P < 0.001). Two thirds (n = 260; 62%) requested more general information. Half of the respondents (n = 202; 48%) requested more practical information and a third (n = 152; 36%) requested more medical information. The preferred way for receiving information was orally (n = 189; 44.7%) or by leaflets (n = 108; 25.5%). Conclusion: The majority of respondents were satisfied concerning information dispensation at the ED, especially regarding medical information. Respondents requested more general and practical information and preferred to receive the information orally or by leaflets

Non-invasive blood pressure and cardiac index measurements using the Finapres Portapres in an emergency department triage setting

Emergency department (ED) patients are triaged to determine the urgency of care. The Finapres Portapres (FP) measures blood pressure (BP) and cardiac output (CO) non-invasively, and may be of added value in early detection of patients at risk for hemodynamic compromise. Objectives Compare non-invasive BP measurements using FP and standard automated sphygmomanometry. Compare FP cardiac index (CI), CO corrected for body surface area, of normotensive patients, to chart-based physician estimate of shock, to discover if there is additional value in CI measurements in triage. Methods ED Patients requiring BP measurement in triage were included. Systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP were measured using both devices during a two minutes measurement. Two physicians independently judged probability of shock, defined as estimated CI ≤ 2.5 L min− 1 m− 2, based on chart review, three weeks after ED visit. Results Of a total of 112 patients 97 patients were included. Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.50 for SBP, 0.53 for DBP, with a Blant-Altman mean bias of 11.3 (upper limit 65.3, lower limit − 42.8) and 7.7 (39.2, − 23.7) for SBP and DBP respectively. In normotensive patients, the group with low FP CI measurements had significantly more cases with physician-estimated shock, compared to the normal to high measurements (P = .036). Conclusions When used as a triage device in the emergency department setting, non-invasive BP measurements using FP do not correlate well with automated sphygmomanometry. However, this study does indicate that use of the FP device in triage may aid physicians to recognize patients in early phases of shoc

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