Emergency physician resource utilization varies by years of experience

Objectives

One of the most pivotal decisions an emergency physician (EP) makes is whether to admit or discharge a patient. The emergency department (ED) work-up leading to this decision involves several resource-intensive tests. Previous studies have demonstrated significant differences in EP resource utilization, measured by lab tests, advanced imaging (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], computed tomography [CT], ultrasound), consultations, and propensity to admit a patient. However, how an EP's years of experience may impact their resource utilization and propensity to admit patients has not been well characterized. This study seeks to better understand how EPs' years of experience, post-residency, relates to their use of advanced imaging and patient disposition.

Methods

Ten years of ED visits were analyzed for this study from a single, academic tertiary care center in the urban Northeast United States. The primary outcomes were utilization of advanced imaging during the visit (CT, MRI, or formal ultrasound) and whether the patient was admitted. EP years of experience was categorized into 0-2 years, 3-5 years, 6-8 years, 9-11 years, and 12 or more years. Patient age, sex, Emergency Severity Index (ESI), and the attending EP's years of experience were collected. The relationship between EP years of experience and each outcome was assessed with a linear mixed model with a random effect for provider and patient age, sex, and ESI as covariates.

Results

A total of 460,937 visits seen by 65 EPs were included in the study. Over one-third (37.6%) of visits had an advanced imaging study ordered and nearly half (49.5%) resulted in admission. Compared to visits with EPs with 0-2 years of experience, visits with EPs with 3-5 or 6-8 years of experience had significantly lower odds of advanced imaging occurring. Visits seen by EPs with more than 2 years of experience had lower odds of admission than visits by EPs with 0-2 years of experience.

Conclusion

More junior EPs tend to order more advanced imaging studies and have a higher propensity to admit patients. This may be due to less comfort in decision-making without advanced imaging or a lower risk tolerance. Conversely, the additional clinical experience of the most senior EPs, with greater than 9 years of experience, likely impacts their resource utilization patterns such that their use of advanced imaging does not significantly differ from the most junior EPs.

Root Cause Analysis of Delayed Emergency Department Computed Tomography Scans

Introduction

A solution for emergency department (ED) congestion remains elusive. As reliance on imaging grows, computed tomography (CT) turnaround time has been identified as a major bottleneck. In this study we sought to identify factors associated with significantly delayed CT in the ED.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of all CT imaging completed at an urban, tertiary care ED from May 1-July 31, 2021. During that period, 5,685 CTs were performed on 4,344 patients, with a median time from CT order to completion of 108 minutes (Quartile 1 [Q1]: 57 minutes, Quartile 3 [Q3]: 182 minutes, interquartile range [IQR]: 125 minutes). Outliers were defined as studies that took longer than 369 minutes to complete (Q3 + 1.5 × IQR). We systematically reviewed outlier charts to determine factors associated with delay and identified five factors: behaviorally non-compliant or medically unstable patients; intravenous (IV) line issues; contrast allergies; glomerular filtration rate (GFR) concerns; and delays related to imaging protocol (eg, need for IV contrast, request for oral and/or rectal contrast). We calculated confidence intervals (CI) using the modified Wald method. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a kappa analysis.

Results

We identified a total of 182 outliers (4.2% of total patients). Fifteen (8.2%) cases were excluded for CT time-stamp inconsistencies. Of the 167 outliers analyzed, 38 delays (22.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17.0-29.7) were due to behaviorally non-compliant or medically unstable patients; 30 (18.0%, 95% CI 12.8-24.5) were due to IV issues; 24 (14.4%, 95% CI 9.8-20.6) were due to contrast allergies; 21 (12.6%, 95% CI 8.3-18.5) were due to GFR concerns; and 20 (12.0%, 95% CI 7.8-17.9) were related to imaging study protocols. The cause of the delay was unknown in 55 cases (32.9%, 95% CI 26.3-40.4).

Conclusion

Our review identified both modifiable and non-modifiable factors associated with significantly delayed CT in the ED. Patient factors such as behavior, allergies, and medical acuity cannot be controlled. However, institutional policies regarding difficult IV access, contrast administration in low GFR settings, and study protocols may be modified, capturing up to 42.6% of outliers.

Practice as you Teach: Comparing Ordering Practices Between Shared and Physician-Only Visits in Academically Affiliated Community Emergency Departments

BACKGROUND

Considerable variability exists in emergency physicians' (EPs) rates of resource utilization, which may cluster in distinct patterns. However, previous studies have focused on academic and tertiary care centers, and it is unclear whether similar patterns exist in community practice.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to examine whether EPs practicing in community emergency departments (EDs) have practice patterns similar to those of academic EDs. Secondarily, we sought to investigate the effects of shared visits with advanced practice professionals and residents.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of two community EDs affiliated with an academic network. There were 62,860 visits among 50 EPs analyzed from October 1, 2018 through January 31, 2020 for rates of advanced imaging, admission, and shared visits. To classify practice patterns, we used a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM), with groups and covariance determined by Bayesian Information Criteria.

RESULTS

Our GMM revealed three groups. The largest had homogeneous patterns of resource use (n = 28; 50% were female; years of experience: 7; interquartile range [IQR] 2-11; advanced imaging: 28%; admission: 19%; shared: 34%), a small group with lower resource use (n = 4; 0% were female; years of experience: 6; IQR 4-10; advanced imaging: 28%; admission: 16%; shared: 8%), and a modest high-resource group (n = 18; 28% female; years of experience: 5; IQR 2-16; advanced imaging: 34%; admission: 23%; shared: 43%). Rates of shared visits had little direct correlation with imaging (r2 = 0.045) or admission (r2 = 0.093), and rates of imaging and admission were weakly correlated (r2 = 0.242).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that community EPs may have multiple patterns of resource use, similar to those in academic EDs.

Characterizing malpractice cases involving emergency department advanced practice providers, physicians in training, and attending physicians

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to evaluate available characteristics and financial costs of malpractice cases among advanced practice providers (APPs; nurse practitioners [NPs] and physician assistants [PAs]), trainees (medical students, residents, fellows), and attending physicians.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of claims occurring in the emergency department (ED) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, contained in the Candello database. Cases were classified according to the provider type(s) involved: NP, PA, trainee, or cases that did not identify an extender as being substantially involved in the adverse event that resulted in the case ("no extender").

RESULTS

There were 5854 cases identified with a total gross indemnity paid of $1,007,879,346. Of these cases, 193 (3.3%) involved an NP, 513 (8.8%) involved a PA, 535 (9.1%) involved a trainee, and 4568 (78.0%) were no extender. Cases where a trainee was involved account for the highest average gross indemnity paid whereas no-extender cases are the lowest. NP and PA cases differed by contributing factors compared to no-extender cases: clinical judgment (NP 89.1% vs. no extender 76.8%, p < 0.0001; PA 84.6% vs. no extender, p < 0.0001), documentation (NP 23.3% vs. no extender 17.8%, p = 0.0489; PA 25.9% vs. no extender, p < 0.0001), and supervision (NP 22.3% vs. no extender 1.8%, p < 0.0001; PA 25.7% vs. no extender p < 0.0001). Cases involving NPs and PAs had a lower percentage of high-severity cases such as loss of limb or death (NP 45.6% vs. no extender 50.2%, p = 0.0004; PA 48.3% vs. no extender, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

APPs and trainees comprise approximately 21% of malpractice cases and 33% of total gross indemnity paid in this large national ED data set. Understanding differences in characteristics of malpractice claims that occur in emergency care settings can be used to help to mitigate provider risk.

Does the number of pages received per hour affect resident productivity?

Background

Workflow interruptions are common for emergency physicians and are shown to have downstream consequences such as patient dissatisfaction, delay in clinical response, and increase in medical error. However, the impact of passive interruptions on physician productivity is unclear and has not been well studied. We sought to evaluate if the number of pages received per hour significantly affects the number of patients seen per hour.

Methods

Retrospective data was collected on resident physician (RP) emergency department shifts from July 1st, 2021 to June 30th, 2022 at an academic medical center with an annual census of 55,000 patients. A total of 2865 RP shifts were collected among the 26 postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and PGY2 residents. For each RP shift, we identified the number of pages received per hour and the number of new patients seen per hour. Pages consist of any transmitted message that was sent to the RP's personal pager, which includes both automatic (eg, bed assignments, abnormal lab values) and personalized pages from other healthcare practicioners (eg, nursing, consultants). Data were analyzed using Poisson regression controlling for clustering at the physician level to determine if the number of patients seen per hour is significantly affected by the number of pages (divided into quartiles) received.

Results

We found the number of pages received per hour did not decrease the number of patients seen per hour. Contrary to our hypothesis, there was a strong positive relationship between the number of pages received per hour and the number of patients seen by RPs in that hour and subsequent hours. During the middle of a shift (hours 3, 4, and 5), RPs receiving pages in the third and fourth quartile (top 50% of pages) saw significantly more patients during that same hour and the next hour (p <0.001).

Conclusion

The number of pages received by RPs per hour did not decrease the number of patients seen per hour. When RPs receive a higher number of pages, there is a positive association with the number of patients they see in that hour and subsequent hours. Further studies will be needed to determine whether the content of pages affects resident productivity.

The association between day of arrival, time of arrival, daily volume and the rate of patients that "left without being seen"

INTRODUCTION

Patients' left without being seen (LWBS) rate is used as an emergency department (ED) quality indicator. Prior research has investigated characteristics of these patients, but there are minimal studies assessing the impact of departmental variables. We evaluate the LWBS rate at a granular level, looking at its relationship to day of week, hour of arrival and total patient volume.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis of 109,983 cases from a single academic center. We captured patient disposition, day of week and hour of day of arrival, and total daily volume. Chi-squared test was performed to determine the difference in LWBS rates based on arrival variables. We ran a polynomial regression for LWBS rates by decile of daily patient volume.

RESULTS

The overall LWBS rate was 1.82% over 2 years. This varied significantly by day of week and hour of day (p < 0.001). Day of week rates ranged from 0.73% on Sunday to 2.45% on Wednesday. Hour of day rates ranged from 0.26% between 8 AM-9 AM, to 3.71% between 10 PM-11 PM. As total daily patient volume increased, LWBS rates gradually increased until the 70th percentile, followed by significant exponential growth afterwards.

DISCUSSION

LWBS rates are not static measurements, and vary greatly depending on ED circumstances. Weekdays and evenings have significantly higher rates. Additionally, LWBS rates climb above 2% as daily registrations reach the 70th percentile, increasing exponentially at each subsequent decile. Understanding these effects will allow for more effective, targeted interventions to minimize this rate and improve throughput.

A retrospective multistate analysis: Do regional football games impact emergency department patient volume?

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the effect of National Football League (NFL) games played by a regional sports team, the New England Patriots, on emergency department (ED) patient volume.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, retrospective chart review at the following 3 tertiary centers in New England from 2012 to 2019: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH; and Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME.

RESULTS

Within the NFL season, we observed a 2.6% overall decrease (-10.4 patients) in average total daily volume across the study sites on Sundays when Patriots games were played compared with Sundays when games were not played (P = 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], -22.37 to 1.62). We observed a 4.3% reduction (-19.0 patients) in average total daily volume across the study sites on Mondays during which Patriots games were played compared with Mondays without games (P = 0.15; 95% CI, -43.51 to 5.47). Subanalyses on the 5-hour period corresponding with each Patriots game showed reductions in mean patient volume per hour. Although our primary and subanalyses showed reductions in patient volume during Patriots games, these results were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support prior studies that showed a minimal impact of major sporting events on ED patient volume at tertiary centers. These results add to the limited data on this topic and can inform administrators whether staffing adjustments are necessary during similar types of sporting events.

Analysis of time-to-disposition intervals during early and late parts of an emergency department shift

INTRODUCTION

Time-to-disposition is an important metric for emergency department throughput. We hypothesized that providers view the shift end as a key timepoint and attempt to leave as few dispositions as possible to the oncoming team, thereby making quicker decisions later in the shift. This study evaluates disposition distribution relative to when patients are assigned a provider during the course of a shift.

METHODS

50,802 cases were analyzed over the one-year study interval. 31,869 patients were seen in the early half of a shift (hours 1-4) and 18,933 were seen in the later half (hours 5+). We ran a linear mixed model that adjusted for age, gender, emergency severity index score, time of day, weekend arrivals, quarter of arrival and shift type.

RESULTS

Median time-to-disposition for the early group was 3.25 h (IQR 1.90-5.04), and 2.62 h (IQR 1.51-4.31) for the late group. From our mixed model, we conclude that in the later parts of the shift, providers take on average 15.1% less time to make a disposition decision than in the earlier parts of the shift.

CONCLUSION

Patients seen during the latter half of a shift were more likely to have a shorter time-to-disposition than similar patients seen in the first half of a shift. This may be influenced by many factors, such as providers spending the early hours of a shift seeing new patients which generate new tasks and delay dispositions, and viewing the end of shift as a landmark with a goal to maximize dispositions prior to sign-out.

Understanding Demand and Capacity Mismatch in an Academic Emergency Department Using a Staircase Model of Provider Capacity and Staggered Shift Start Times

BACKGROUND

Staffing and provider capacity are essential components of emergency department (ED) throughput. Patient flow is dependent on matching patient arrivals with provider capacity. Current models assume a static rate of patients per hour for providers; however, this metric has been shown to decrease throughout a shift in a pattern we describe as a staircase.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to analyze the demand capacity mismatch based on both a static and staircase model of resident productivity. We then suggest a new staggered staffing model that would improve flow in the ED.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of patient demand and productivity, analyzing both static and staircase models of provider capacity. An alternative staggered shift model was then suggested, and a 2-sample t test was performed to assess if a new model reduces the amount of demand/capacity mismatch.

RESULTS

Seventeen thousand five hundred twenty data points were analyzed over the 2-year interval, comparing the difference between actual patients placed into a treatment space at each hour and projected resident capacity based on the staircase model, using both the existing schedule and a new staggered schedule. Mean absolute values for the disparity in coverage was 2.69 (95% confidence interval 2.65-2.72) for the staircase scheduling model, and 2.14 (95% confidence interval 2.12-2.17) when staggering provider start times. The mean difference between these data sets was 0.54 (95% confidence interval 0.52-0.57; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Academic EDs may find value in using a staircase model to analyze provider capacity because it is more reflective of actual capacity. EDs may benefit from visualizing their capacity curves to identify mismatches and staggering resident shifts to improve throughput and flow.

Who should we treat: elective surgical admissions or patients with COVID-19?

In the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care leaders must work to optimize emergency department and hospital efficiency while maintaining patient access to care.