Literature Synthesis: Patient Aggression Risk Assessment Tools in the Emergency Department

Caring for critically ill patients with a mental illness: A discursive paper providing an overview and case exploration of the delivery of intensive care to people with psychiatric comorbidity

AIM

To address the need for additional education in the management of mental illness in the critical care setting by providing a broad overview of the interrelationship between critical illness and mental illness. The paper also offers practical advice to support critical care staff in managing patients with mental illness in critical care by discussing two hypothetical case scenarios involving aggressive and disorganised behaviour. People living with mental illness are over-represented among critically unwell patients and experience worse outcomes, contributing to a life expectancy up to 30 years shorter than their peers. Strategic documents call for these inequitable outcomes to be addressed. Staff working in intensive care units (ICUs) possess advanced knowledge and specialist skills in managing critical illness but have reported limited confidence in managing patients with comorbid mental illness.

DESIGN & METHODS

A discursive paper, drawing on clinical experience and research of the authors and current literature.

RESULTS

Like all people, patients with mental illnesses draw on their cognitive, behavioural, social and spiritual resources to cope with their experiences during critical illness. However, they may have fewer resources available due to co-morbid mental illness, a history of trauma and social disadvantage. By identifying and sensitively addressing patients' underlying needs in a trauma-informed way, demonstrating respect and maximising patient autonomy, staff can reduce distress and disruptive behaviours and promote recovery. Caring for patients who are distressed and/or display challenging behaviours can evoke strong and unpleasant emotional responses. Self-care is fundamental to maintaining a compassionate approach and effective clinical judgement. Staff should be enabled to accept and acknowledge emotional responses and access support-informally with peers and/or through formal mechanisms as needed. Organisational leadership and endorsement of the principles of equitable care are critical to creation of the environment needed to improve outcomes for staff and patients.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

ICU nurses hold an important role in the care of patients with critical illnesses and are ideally placed to empower, advocate for and comfort those patients also living with mental illness. To perform these tasks optimally and sustainably, health services have a responsibility to provide nursing staff with adequate education and training in the management of mental illnesses, and sufficient formal and informal support to maintain their own well-being while providing this care.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

This paper is grounded in accounts of patients with mental illness and clinicians providing care to patients with mental illness in critical care settings but there was no direct patient or public contribution.

Implementation of an Assault Prevention Quality Improvement Initiative in an Urban Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Emergency department (ED) health care workers experience high rates of workplace violence (WPV).

LOCAL PROBLEM

Patient-to-staff physical assaults at an urban, academic adult ED ranged between 1 and 5 per month, with a rate of 0.265 per 1000 patient visits.

METHODS

A quality improvement initiative, guided by the Social Ecological Model framework that contextualized WPV in the ED setting, informed the development of a Risk for Violence Screening Tool (RVST) to screen adult patients presenting to the ED.

INTERVENTIONS

Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were utilized to implement a violence prevention bundle that incorporated the RVST, an alert system, and focused assault reduction strategies.

RESULTS

Patient-to-staff physical assaults decreased to a rate of 0.146 per 1000 patient visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk for violence screening, an alert system, and assault prevention strategies provide opportunities for nurse leaders to promote ED workplace safety.

Increasing Understanding and Perceived Confidence of Nurses Working in an Emergency Department in Assessing Patients at Risk of Violent Behavior

PURPOSE

The aims of this quality improvement project were to improve understanding and perceived confidence in using a tool that assesses patients at risk of violence.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Brøset Violence Checklist is valid at assessing patients at risk of violence. Participants were given access to an e-learning module that demonstrated how to use the tool. Improvement in understanding and perceived confidence in using the tool were assessed preintervention and postintervention via an investigator-developed survey. Analysis of the data was conducted using descriptive statistics, and open-ended survey responses were analyzed using content analysis.

OUTCOME

Participants did not demonstrate an increase in understanding and perceived confidence after introduction of the e-learning module. Nurses reported that the Brøset Violence Checklist was easy to use, clear, reliable, and accurate and could be used to standardize assessments of at-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

Emergency department nursing staff were educated in use of a risk assessment tool for identifying patients at risk of violence. This supported the implementation and integration of the tool into emergency department workflow.

Screening for Behavioral Health Patient Aggression in Emergency Departments to Reduce Workplace Violence

INTRODUCTION

Patient violence in health care facilities occurs daily. Structured risk assessments, when regularly completed, have been effective in prompting interventions to reduce aggression in Behavioral Health (BH) settings.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study evaluated the effectiveness of the Dynamic Appraisal of Situational Aggression - Inpatient Version (DASA) validated screening tool to reduce aggressive outbursts in an emergency department (ED) setting with BH patients awaiting transfer to a psychiatric facility. The tool was used in 4 non-psychiatric EDs from a large health care system. Chart audits were completed to record initial patient DASA scores observed at triage and at subsequent intervals during the ED encounter. ED staff documented interventions used for patients. Inclusion criteria included adults 21 years and older following a telepsychiatry consultation with a recommendation for BH inpatient admission. Pre-/post-implementation aggressive events were collected to assess ED DASA use. DASA scores from BH ED patients were examined to increase understanding of patient utilization. Staff workplace safety was examined to compare staff safety perception pre- and post-DASA implementation.

RESULTS

Violent events were reported statistically significantly higher post-DASA implementation. There was an increased risk of elevated DASA scores for specific diagnoses and genders. An increased awareness of the importance of reporting workplace violence improved documentation.

DISCUSSION

Using an evidence-based screening tool helped identify BH patients with behaviors associated with aggressive ED events. Proactive use of interventions, including use of Comfort Cart items, de-escalation, and prescribed medications, can positively influence reduction of risk from aggressive behaviors within BH patient populations in EDs.

Introducing a Digital Occupational Violence Risk Assessment Tool Into an Emergency Department: A Pilot Implementation Study

INTRODUCTION

Occupational violence in emergency departments is prevalent and detrimental to staff and health services. There is an urgent call for solutions; accordingly, this study describes the implementation and early impacts of the digital Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool (kwov-pro).

METHODS

Since December 7, 2021, emergency nurses have been using the Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool to assess 3 occupational violence risk factors in patients: aggression history, behaviors, and clinical presentation. Violence risk then is categorized as low (0 risk factors), moderate (1 risk factor), or high (2-3 risk factors). An important feature of this digital innovation is the alert and flagging system for high-risk patients. Underpinned by the Implementation Strategies for Evidence-Based Practice Guide, from November 2021 to March 2022 we progressively mobilized a range of strategies, including e-learning, implementation drivers, and regular communications. Early impacts measured were the percentage of nurses who completed their e-learning, the proportion of patients assessed using the Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool, and the number of reported violent incidents in the emergency department.

RESULTS

Overall, 149 of 195 (76%) of emergency nurses completed their e-learning. Further, adherence to Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool was good, with 65% of patients assessed for risk of violence at least once. Since implementing the Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool, there has been a progressive decrease in violent incidents reported in the emergency department.

DISCUSSION

Using a combination of strategies, the Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool was successfully implemented in the emergency department with the indication that it could reduce the number of incidents of occupational violence. The work herein provides a foundation for future translation and robust evaluation of the Queensland Occupational Violence Patient Risk Assessment Tool in emergency departments.

Inter-rater reliability of the occupational violence risk assessment tool for emergency departments

BACKGROUND

The three-item occupational violence (OV) risk assessment tool was developed and validated for use in emergency departments (EDs). It prompts review of each patient's aggression history, behaviours, and clinical presentation. However, confidence around representativeness and generalisability are needed before widescale adoption; hence we measured the inter-rater reliability of the tool among a large group of emergency nurses.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted between Sep 2021 and Jan 2022. Nurses were directed to a website that hosted an e-learning module about the tool. They were asked to apply the tool to two video scenarios of typical patient presentations. Demographic data, including years of emergency experience, were collected to contextualise their responses. Gwet's Agreement Coefficients (AC1) were calculated to determine inter-rater reliability.

RESULTS

There were 135 participants: typically female, under the age of 40 years, with more than 3 years of emergency nursing experience. Overall, there was excellent inter-rater agreement (AC1 =0.752, p = 0.001). This was consistent when years of ED experience was stratified: 0-2 years, AC1 = 0.764, p = 0.002; 3-5 years, AC1 = 0.826, p = 0.001; 6-10 years, AC1 = 0.751, p < 0.001; 11-15 years, AC1 = 0.659, p = 0.004; ≥ 16 years, AC1 = 0.799, p < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

The three-item OV risk assessment tool has excellent inter-rater reliability across a large sample of emergency nurses.

Multisite study of Aggressive Behavior Risk Assessment Tool in emergency departments

Objective

Violence is a major preventable problem in emergency departments (EDs), and validated screening tools are needed to identify potentially violent patients. We aimed to test the utility of the Aggressive Behavior Risk Assessment Tool (ABRAT) for screening patients in the ED.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted among adult and pediatric patients aged ≥10 years visiting 3 emergency departments in Michigan between May 1, 2021, and June 30, 2021. Triage nurses completed the 16-item checklist using electronic health records (EHRs), and the occurrence of violent incidents were collected before ED disposition. A multivariate logistic regression model was applied to select a parsimonious set of items.

Results

Among 10,554 patients, 127 had ≥1 violent incidents (1.2%). The regression model resulted in a 7-item ABRAT for EDs, including history of aggression and mental illness and reason for visit, as well as 4 violent behavior indicators. Receiver operating characteristics analysis showed that the area under the curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.95), with a sensitivity of 84.3% (95% CI, 76.5%-89.9%) and specificity of 95.3% (95% CI, 94.8%-95.7%) at the optimal cutoff score of 1. An alternative cutoff score of 4 for identifying patients at high risk for violence had a sensitivity and specificity of 70.1% and 98.9%, respectively.

Conclusion

The ABRAT for EDs appears to be a simple yet comprehensive checklist with a high sensitivity and specificity for identifying potentially violent patients in EDs. The availability of such a screening checklist in the EHR may allow rapid identification of high-risk patients and implementation of focused mitigation measures to protect emergency staff and patients.

Development and Implementation of an Emergent Documentation Aggression Rating Tool: Quality Improvement

INTRODUCTION

Workplace violence is prevalent in the emergency department, putting patients and staff at risk for harm. An ED-specific standardized tool is needed to promote a consistent assessment process to strengthen documentation of escalating patient behaviors, give justification for de-escalating interventions, and reduce restraints. The purpose of this project was to design, implement, and evaluate feasibility of an ED-specific tool to help nurses proactively identify and intervene with patients' escalating behaviors, capture better documentation of aggressive/violent patient events, and reduce restraint usage.

METHODS

A quality improvement design was used. The Emergent Documentation Aggression Rating Tool was constructed by combining evidence-based behavioral cues for potential aggression/violence with observed behaviors and successfully implemented interventions in patients. Nurses were trained on how to use the tool to rate patients' behaviors and take necessary action. Chart data were collected from August 2018 to December 2019 at a Midwestern Suburban Hospital Emergency Department. Chart audits and just-in-time education were conducted after implementation. Survey data were collected to evaluate nurses' perception of the tool's usefulness.

RESULTS

Use of the novel Emergent Documentation Aggression Rating Tool increased over time (67.36% in Quarter 3 2018 to 97.55% in Quarter 4 2019). After Emergent Documentation Aggression Rating Tool implementation, visual inspection of the time series indicated a decrease in percent restraints, and there was an overall increase in documented escalations de-escalations over time. The patients that escalated most frequently had diagnoses of alcohol use, suicidal ideations, pain-related complaints, or mental health issues.

CONCLUSION

The Emergent Documentation Aggression Rating Tool was feasible for emergency nurses to proactively identify and intervene with patients at risk for aggression/violence.

What can we do about occupational violence in emergency departments? A survey of emergency staff

AIMS

To explore and collate solutions for occupational violence from emergency department (ED) staff.

BACKGROUND

Despite publications highlighting the progressively worsening issue of occupational violence in EDs and its detrimental impacts, few strategies aimed to reduce or manage it have been discussed in the literature.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study involving ED staff. Participants completed an electronic survey that prompted interventions for occupational violence. Free-text data were analysed and logically categorized using validated techniques.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 81) suggested 24 interventions: 12 were classified as prevention strategies, 10 as response strategies and two as recovery strategies. Prevention and response strategies for occupational violence targeted key participants: patients, staff and ED environment. Recovery strategies centred around staff management of the personal impacts of incidences of occupational violence and on systems in place to support them after occupational violence incidents.

CONCLUSION

Solutions to occupational violence should be multifaceted encompassing prevention, response and recovery for patients, staff and the ED environment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

No single, universal intervention can be endorsed to reduce or mitigate the impacts of occupational violence in EDs. However, a combination of the interventions (strategies) discussed in this paper can be recommended.

Engaging with nurses to develop an occupational violence risk assessment tool for use in emergency departments: A participatory action research inquiry

BACKGROUND

Early detection of occupational violence (OV) risk factors could facilitate timely and appropriate management of patients in the emergency department. For this purpose, an OV risk assessment could be useful and best initiated at triage.

AIMS

To understand the need for and determine potential utility and desirable components of an OV risk assessment tool; and to determine specific challenges to its implementation if appropriate.

METHODS

A participatory action research was conducted. Data were collected through focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was done inductively and collaboratively using Braun and Clarke's technique.

FINDINGS

Six themes were identified from triage nurses (N = 15) pertaining to: i) OV risk assessment; ii) communication of OV risk; iii) clinical implications of risk assessment; iv) tool attributes; v) future implementation challenges; vi) unintended consequences.

CONCLUSION

The development of an OV risk assessment tool is supported, but with very specific attributes. Findings herein also have implications on the implementation and evaluation of this tool in emergency settings.

The validity and utility of violence risk assessment tools to predict patient violence in acute care settings: An integrative literature review

To examine risk assessment tools to predict patient violence in acute care settings. An integrative review of the literature. Five electronic databases - CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE, OVID, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched between 2000 and 2018. The reference list of articles was also inspected manually. The PICOS framework was used to refine the inclusion and exclusion of the literature, and the PRISMA statement guided the search strategy to systematically present findings. Forty-one studies were retained for review. Three studies developed or tested tools to measure patient violence in general acute care settings, and two described the primary and secondary development of tools in emergency departments. The remaining studies reported on risk assessment tools that were developed or tested in psychiatric inpatient settings. In total, 16 violence risk assessment tools were identified. Thirteen of them were developed to assess the risk of violence in psychiatric patients. Two of them were found to be accurate and reliable to predict violence in acute psychiatric facilities and have practical utility for general acute care settings. Two assessment tools were developed and administered in general acute care, and one was developed to predict patient violence in emergency departments. There is no single, user-friendly, standardized evidence-based tool available for predicting violence in general acute care hospitals. Some were found to be accurate in assessing violence in psychiatric inpatients and have potential for use in general acute care, require further testing to assess their validity and reliability.

Management of the aggressive emergency department patient: non-pharmacological perspectives and evidence base

INTRODUCTION

Aggression in the Emergency Department (ED) remains an ongoing issue, described as reaching epidemic proportions, with an impact on staff recruitment, retention, and ability to provide quality care. Most literature has focused on the definition (or lack of) core concepts, efforts to quantify the phenomenon or provide an epidemiological profile. Relatively little offers evidence-based interventions or evaluations of the same.

AIM

To identify the range of suggested practices and the evidence base for currently recommended actions relating to the management of the aggressive Emergency Department patient.

METHODS

A meta-synthesis of existing reviews of violence and aggression in the acute health-care setting, including management of the aggressive patient, was undertaken. This provided the context for critical consideration of the management of this patient group in the ED and implications for clinical practice.

RESULTS

An initial outline of issues was followed by a systematic search and 15 reviews were further assessed. Commonly identified interventions are grouped around educational, interpersonal, environmental, and physical responses. These actions can be focused in terms of overall responses to the wider issues of violence and aggression, targeted at the pre-event, event, or post-event phase in terms of strategies; however, there is a very limited evidence base to show the effectiveness of strategies suggested.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The lack of evidence-based intervention strategies leaves clinicians in a difficult situation, often enacting practices based on anecdote rather than evidence. Local solutions to local problems are occurring in a pragmatic manner, but there needs to be clarification and integration of workable processes for evaluating and disseminating best practice.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence reporting on interventional studies, in addition to identification of the need for high quality longitudinal and evaluation studies to determine the efficacy of those responses that have been identified.

Interventions to prevent aggression against doctors: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To find out if there is evidence on interventions to prevent aggression against doctors.

DESIGN

This systematic review searched the literature and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Pubmed, Embase, Turning Research into Practice (TRIP), Cochrane and Psycharticle, GoogleScholar and www.guideline.gov were consulted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Abstracts published in English between January 2000 and January 2018 were screened. Eligible studies focused on prevention and risk factors of type II workplace violence in general healthcare, psychiatric departments, emergency departments, emergency primary care, general practice.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The selected intervention studies were grouped into quantitative and qualitative studies. Systematic reviews were reported separately. For each study, the design, type of intervention and key findings were analysed. Quality rating was based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQUAL).

RESULTS

44 studies are included. One randomised controlled trial (RCT) provided moderate evidence that a violence prevention programme was effective in decreasing risks of violence. Major risk factors are long waiting times, discrepancy between patients' expectations and services, substance abuse by the patient and psychiatric conditions. Appropriate workplace design and policies aim to reduce risk factors but there is no hard evidence on the effectiveness. One RCT provided evidence that a patient risk assessment combined with tailored actions decreased severe aggression events in psychiatric wards. Applying de-escalation techniques during an aggressive event is highly recommended. Postincident reporting followed by root cause analysis of the incident provides the basic input for review and optimisation of violence prevention programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

This review documented interventions to prevent and de-escalate aggression against doctors. Aggression against physicians is a serious occupational hazard. There is moderate evidence that an integrated violence prevention programme decreases the risks of patient-to-worker violence. The review failed to gather sufficient numerical data to perform a meta-analysis. A large-scale cohort study would add to a better understanding of the effectiveness of interventions.

Care provider allocation on admissions to acute mental health wards: The development and validation of the Admission Team Score List

Currently, support tools are lacking to prioritize steps in the care coordination process to enable safe practice and effective clinical pathways in the first phase of acute psychiatric admissions. This study describes the development, validity, and reliability of an acute care coordination support tool, the Admission Team Score List (ATSL). The ATSL assists in care provider allocation during admissions. Face validity and feasibility of the ATSL were tested in 77 acute admissions. Endscores of filled out ATSL's were translated to recommended team compositions. These ATSL team (ATSL-T) compositions were compared to the actually present team (AP-T) and the most preferred team (MP-T) composition in hindsight. Consistency between the ATSL-T and the MP-T was substantial; K_w  = 0.70, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.55-0.84]. The consistency between the ATSL-T and AP-T was moderate; K_w  = 0.43, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.23-0.62]. The ATSL has an adequate (inter-rater) reliability; ICC = 0.90, P < 0.001, 95% CI [0.65-0.91]. The ATSL study is an important step to promote safety and efficient care based on care provider allocation, for service users experiencing an acute admission. The ATSL may stimulate structured clinical decision-making during the hectic process around acute psychiatric admissions.

[Barriers to and facilitators for using a risk assessment tool to prevent violent behaviour in patients with mental health conditions: Perspectives of health care providers]

Regular assessment of risk of violence is shown to be effective in reducing violence in mental health services.

PURPOSE

To evaluate health care providers' use of a violence risk assessment tool on a mental health unit and the facilitators for and barriers to its use.

METHODS

A descriptive study using the Dillman approach and informed by the Knowledge to Action framework was conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-six health care providers responded to the survey; 62% reported using the violence risk assessment tool available on their unit, but not on a daily basis. Common barriers were lack of knowledge of the tool, lack of resources and time, and negative attitudes toward patients. 42% of participants indicated the need for further training on violence risk assessment.

CONCLUSION

Despite high exposure to violence, health professionals were not conducting daily risk assessments. The barriers and facilitators identified provide direction for interventions that are necessary if the daily use of violence risk assessment tools is to be increased.

Predicting aggressive patient behaviour in a hospital emergency department: An empirical study of security officers using the Brøset Violence Checklist

INTRODUCTION

The Brøset Violence Checklist (BVC) is a six item checklist that rates patients according to their risk of violence in the subsequent 24h - a score of ?3 indicates a "high risk" of violence. This study is the first to evaluate the statistical utility of the BVC when administered by a security officer in a hospital emergency department (ED).

METHOD

A healthcare security officer conducted BVC assessments on patients who presented to the ED of a public hospital in metropolitan South East Queensland, Australia, over a two month period. Violent/aggressive acts requiring security intervention were registered in a database.

RESULTS

2064 ED patients were assessed on the BVC and 35 patients committed a violent/aggressive act (1.7%). BVC sensitivity was 45.7% and specificity 99.4%. At a cut-off score of BVC3, the positive predictive value was 55.2%. Violent patients were around 71 times more likely to score BVC?3 than non-violent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The BVC has good sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value in this setting. Using the BVC may help to implement measures that mitigate the impact of violent patients in the ED, or ideally, implement procedures that prevent violence towards ED workers in the first place.