Sustainability of a Clinical Decision Support Intervention for Outpatient Care for Emergency Department Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism

Controversies in the Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is frequently diagnosed in the Emergency Department (ED), and the management approach can be nuanced.

OBJECTIVE

In this narrative review, we synthesize the literature in selected areas of ongoing controversy regarding the diagnostic and management approaches for acute PE in the ED, and provide evidence-based recommendations to empower emergency physicians (EPs) to provide optimal care in these situations.

DISCUSSION

d-Dimer is used to clinically exclude the diagnosis of PE patients who are stratified as low risk. However by utilizing likelihood ratio and with certain scoring tools, patient historically considered moderate or high risk for PE may safely be able to have the diagnosis excluded with a negative d-dimer. Traditional risk stratification and management strategies can be cautiously applied to patients with concomitant Coronavirus-19 infection while awaiting more definitive studies. There is an increasing trend in the diagnosis of isolated subsegmental PE, and many patients receiving this diagnosis may be treated without anticoagulation provided that they have no evidence of associated deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and can be closely followed as an outpatient. There is a persistent hesitancy to discharge patients with newly diagnosed acute PE, and existing well-supported risk stratification tools and clinical decision frameworks can support the EP's decision to safely discharge low-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

tThis review of the literature empowers emergency clinicians to manage challenging PE cases in the ED.

Barriers and facilitators to high-volume evidence-based innovation and implementation in a large, community-based learning health system

BACKGROUND

Broad-scale, rapid health care change is critically needed to improve value-based, effective health care. Health care providers and systems need to address common barriers and facilitators across the evidence to implementation pathway, across diverse specialties. However, most evidence translation / implementation research evaluates single topic areas, and may be of limited value for informing comprehensive efforts. This project's objective was to identify, characterize, and illustrate common trans-topic facilitators and barriers of translating new health care evidence results to clinical implementation across multiple medical specialties.

METHODS

This study was an evaluation of all evidence-based innovation projects completed during 2019-2021. Each project was created with medical group clinical leaders and was intended to inform clinical care. The evaluation took place in a large community-based integrated health care system, and an embedded delivery science and applied research program. Clinical investigators, scientific investigators, and clinical operational leaders received structured questionnaires regarding barriers and facilitators for the operational implementation of new research findings for each project. Responses were mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify perceived implementation barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

All 48 projects completed between 2019 and 2021 were evaluated; responses were received for 45 (94%) and 34 had comments mappable to framework domains. Potential barriers and facilitators to clinical implementation of new research results were identified across all five framework domains and, within these, the 38 constructs or sub-constructs. Among 245 total comments, the most commonly cited facilitators were how the new research evidence generated, compelled change (n = 29), specialty communication networks for disseminating results and initiating change (n = 20), leadership engagement in the project (n = 19), and the innovation's relative advantage over existing practices (n = 11). The most commonly cited barriers were inadequate resource commitment for next-step implementation (n = 15), insufficient learning/implementation culture (n = 5), and insufficient individual-level willingness/ability for change (n = 5).

CONCLUSIONS

A novel large-scale evaluation of barriers and facilitators across the evidence to implementation pathway identified common factors across multiple topic areas and specialties. These common potentially replicable facilitators and modifiable barriers can focus health systems and leaders pursuing large-volume evidence-to-implementation initiatives on those areas with the likely greatest benefit-for-effort, for accelerating health care change.

Development and Validation of a Natural Language Processing Model to Identify Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism in Real Time to Facilitate Safe Outpatient Management

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to (1) develop and validate a natural language processing model to identify the presence of pulmonary embolism (PE) based on real-time radiology reports and (2) identify low-risk PE patients based on previously validated risk stratification scores using variables extracted from the electronic health record at the time of diagnosis. The combination of these approaches yielded an natural language processing-based clinical decision support tool that can identify patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with low-risk PE as candidates for outpatient management.

METHODS

Data were curated from all patients who received a PE-protocol computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (PE-CTPA) imaging study in the ED of a 3-hospital academic health system between June 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 (n=12,183). The "preliminary" radiology reports from these imaging studies made available to ED clinicians at the time of diagnosis were adjudicated as positive or negative for PE by the clinical team. The reports were then divided into development, internal validation, and temporal validation cohorts in order to train, test, and validate an natural language processing model that could identify the presence of PE based on unstructured text. For risk stratification, patient- and encounter-level data elements were curated from the electronic health record and used to compute a real-time simplified pulmonary embolism severity (sPESI) score at the time of diagnosis. Chart abstraction was performed on all low-risk PE patients admitted for inpatient management.

RESULTS

When applied to the internal validation and temporal validation cohorts, the natural language processing model identified the presence of PE from radiology reports with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.99, sensitivity of 0.86 to 0.87, and specificity of 0.99. Across cohorts, 10.5% of PE-CTPA studies were positive for PE, of which 22.2% were classified as low-risk by the sPESI score. Of all low-risk PE patients, 74.3% were admitted for inpatient management.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that a natural language processing-based model utilizing real-time radiology reports can accurately identify patients with PE. Further, this model, used in combination with a validated risk stratification score (sPESI), provides a clinical decision support tool that accurately identifies patients in the ED with low-risk PE as candidates for outpatient management.

Disposition of emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism after ambulance arrival

Objective

Most outpatients with pulmonary embolism (PE) are diagnosed in the emergency department (ED). The relationship between means of arrival, site of diagnosis, and disposition in ED patients with PE is unknown. We compared discharge home between patients arriving by emergency medical services (EMS) and those arriving by other means. Within the EMS cohort, we compared those with a recent PE diagnosis in the outpatient clinic setting to those who were diagnosed with PE in the ED.

Methods

This study was a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort that included all adult, non-pregnant ED patients treated for acute PE across 21 community EDs from January 2013 to April 2015. The primary outcome was discharge home within 24 h of ED registration; we also examined mortality. We described associations with patient arrival method and other patient characteristics.

Results

Among 2996 ED patient encounters with acute PE, 644 (21.5%) arrived by EMS. This group had a lower frequency of discharge (9.2% vs 26.4%) and higher 30-day all-cause mortality (8.7% vs 3.1%) than their counterparts (p < 0.001 for both). These associations remained after adjusting for confounding variables. Among the EMS cohort, 14 patients (2.2%) arrived with a PE diagnosis recently made in the outpatient setting.

Conclusion

Patients with PE who arrived at the ED by EMS were less likely to be discharged home within 24 h and more likely to die within 30 days than those who arrived by other means. Less than 3% of the EMS group had been diagnosed with PE before ED arrival.

Bilateral Emboli and Highest Heart Rate Predict Hospitalization of Emergency Department Patients With Acute, Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Some patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) will suffer adverse clinical outcomes despite being low risk by clinical decision rules. Emergency physician decisionmaking processes regarding which low-risk patients require hospitalization are unclear. Higher heart rate (HR) or embolic burden may increase short-term mortality risk, and we hypothesized that these variables would be associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalization for patients designated as low risk by the PE Severity Index.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 461 adult emergency department (ED) patients with a PE Severity Index score of fewer than 86 points. Primary exposures were the highest observed ED HR, most proximal embolus location (proximal vs distal), and embolism laterality (bilateral vs unilateral PE). The primary outcome was hospitalization.

RESULTS

Of 461 patients meeting inclusion criteria, most (57.5%) were hospitalized, 2 patients (0.4%) died within 30 days, and 142 (30.8%) patients were at elevated risk by other criteria (Hestia criteria or biochemical/radiographic right ventricular dysfunction). Variablesassociated with an increased likelihood of admission were highest observed ED HR of ≥110 beats/minute (vs HR <90 beats/min) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07 to 9.57), highest ED HR 90 to 109 (aOR 2.03; 95% CI 1.18-3.50) and bilateral PE (aOR 1.92; 95% CI 1.13 to 3.27). Proximal embolus location was not associated with the likelihood of hospitalization (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.71 to 2.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients were hospitalized, often with recognizable high-risk characteristics not accounted for by the PE Severity Index. Highest ED HR of ≥90 beats/min and bilateral PE were associated with a physician's decision for hospitalization.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Outpatient Management of Low-risk Pulmonary Embolism From the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Although recommended by professional society guidelines, outpatient management of low-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) from emergency departments (EDs) in the US remains uncommon. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to the outpatient management of PE from the ED using implementation science methodology.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with a purposeful sample of emergency physicians using maximum variation sampling, aiming to recruit physicians with diverse practice patterns regarding the management of low-risk PE. We developed an interview guide using the implementation science frameworks-the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process.

RESULTS

We interviewed 26 emergency physicians from 11 hospital systems, and the participants were diverse with regard to years in practice, practice setting, and engagement with outpatient management of PE. Although outer setting determinants, such as medicolegal climate, follow-up, and insurance status were universal, our participants revealed that the importance of these determinants were moderated by individual-level and inner setting determinants. Prominent themes included belief in consequences, belief in capabilities, and institutional support and culture. Inertia of clinical practice and complexity of the process were important subthemes.

CONCLUSION

In this qualitative study, clinicians reported common barriers and facilitators that initially focused on outer setting and external barriers but centered on clinician beliefs, fear, and local culture. Efforts to increase outpatient treatment of select patients with acute PE should be informed by these barriers and facilitators, which are aligned with the deimplementation theory.

Home treatment versus early discharge for the outpatient management of acute pulmonary embolism: A non-interventional, post-hoc cohort analysis

INTRODUCTION

We prospectively investigated whether home treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE), is as effective and safe as the recommended early discharge management in terms of outcomes at 3 months.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of prospectively and consecutively recorded data in acute PE patients from a tertiary care facility between January 2012 and November 2021. Home treatment was defined as discharge to home directly from the emergency department (ED) after <24 h stay. Early discharge was defined as in-hospital stay of ≥24 h and ≤48 h. Primary efficacy and safety outcomes were a composite of PE-related death or recurrent venous thrombo-embolism, and major bleeding, respectively. Outcomes between groups were compared using penalized multivariable models.

RESULTS

In total, 181 patients (30.6 %) were included in the home treatment group and 463 (69.4 %) patients in the early discharge group. Median duration of ED stay was 8.1 h (IQR, 3.6-10.2 h) in the home treatment group, and median length of hospital stay was 36.4 h (IQR, 28.7-40.2) in the early discharge group. The adjusted rate of the primary efficacy outcome was 1.90 % (95 % CI, 0.16-15.2) vs 2.05 % (95 % CI, 0.24-10.1) for home treatment vs early discharge (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86 (95 % CI, 0.27-2.74). The adjusted rates of the primary safety outcome did not differ between groups at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In a non-randomized cohort of selected acute PE patients, home treatment provided comparable rates of adverse VTE and bleeding events to the recommended early discharge management, and appears to have similar clinical outcomes at 3 months.

Clinical decision support to Optimize Care of patients with Atrial Fibrillation or flutter in the Emergency department: protocol of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized pragmatic trial (O'CAFÉ trial)

BACKGROUND

Management of adults with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter in the emergency department (ED) includes rate reduction, cardioversion, and stroke prevention. Different approaches to these components of care may lead to variation in frequency of hospitalization and stroke prevention actions, with significant implications for patient experience, cost of care, and risk of complications. Standardization using evidence-based recommendations could reduce variation in management, preventable hospitalizations, and stroke risk.

METHODS

We describe the rationale for our ED-based AF treatment recommendations. We also describe the development of an electronic clinical decision support system (CDSS) to deliver these recommendations to emergency physicians at the point of care. We implemented the CDSS at three pilot sites to assess feasibility and solicit user feedback. We will evaluate the impact of the CDSS on hospitalization and stroke prevention actions using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized pragmatic clinical trial across 13 community EDs in Northern California.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that the CDSS intervention will reduce hospitalization of adults with isolated AF or atrial flutter presenting to the ED and increase anticoagulation prescription in eligible patients at the time of ED discharge and within 30 days. If our hypotheses are confirmed, the treatment protocol and CDSS could be recommended to other EDs to improve management of adults with AF or atrial flutter.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05009225 .  Registered on 17 August 2021.

Extracting patient-level data from the electronic health record: Expanding opportunities for health system research

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological studies of interstitial lung disease (ILD) are limited by small numbers and tertiary care bias. Investigators have leveraged the widespread use of electronic health records (EHRs) to overcome these limitations, but struggle to extract patient-level, longitudinal clinical data needed to address many important research questions. We hypothesized that we could automate longitudinal ILD cohort development using the EHR of a large, community-based healthcare system.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We applied a previously validated algorithm to the EHR of a community-based healthcare system to identify ILD cases between 2012-2020. We then extracted disease-specific characteristics and outcomes using fully automated data-extraction algorithms and natural language processing of selected free-text.

RESULTS

We identified a community cohort of 5,399 ILD patients (prevalence = 118 per 100,000). Pulmonary function tests (71%) and serologies (54%) were commonly used in the diagnostic evaluation, whereas lung biopsy was rare (5%). IPF was the most common ILD diagnosis (n = 972, 18%). Prednisone was the most commonly prescribed medication (911, 17%). Nintedanib and pirfenidone were rarely prescribed (n = 305, 5%). ILD patients were high-utilizers of inpatient (40%/year hospitalized) and outpatient care (80%/year with pulmonary visit), with sustained utilization throughout the post-diagnosis study period.

DISCUSSION

We demonstrated the feasibility of robustly characterizing a variety of patient-level utilization and health services outcomes in a community-based EHR cohort. This represents a substantial methodological improvement by alleviating traditional constraints on the accuracy and clinical resolution of such ILD cohorts; we believe this approach will make community-based ILD research more efficient, effective, and scalable.