A report on the Academic Emergency Medicine 2015 consensus conference “Diagnostic imaging in the emergency department: a research agenda to optimize utilization”

Global emergency medicine research priorities: a mapping review

Recognizing and prioritizing research areas in emergency care is crucial for generating evidence and advancing research programs, aiming to enhance health outcomes for both individuals and populations. The objective of this review is to document global clinical and nonclinical research priorities. The Emergency Medicine Education and Research by Global Experts network, consisting of 22 sites across six continents, conducted a mapping review of publications on emergency medicine research priorities (2000-2022) across seven databases. We included studies with replicable methodologies for determining research priorities, excluding those limited to individual diseases. Three reviewers independently screened, selected, and categorized results into clinical and nonclinical topics. Discrepancies were resolved by an independent investigator and consensus. Outcomes measures and analysis include descriptive analysis of research priorities grouped into clinical and nonclinical topics, characteristics of publications including countries represented in the author list, target audience (such as researchers or policy makers), participants (e.g. patients), and methods (e.g. Delphi) of priority setting. Among 968 screened papers, 57 publications from all WHO regions were included. Most (36, 63%) had authors from only a single country, primarily in North America and Europe. Patient representatives were included in only 10 (18%). Clinical research priorities clustered into resuscitation, cardiology, central nervous system, emergency medical services, infectious disease, mental health, respiratory disease, and trauma. Distribution was broad in North America and Europe but focused on infectious diseases and resuscitation in Africa and Asia. Eleven nonclinical topics included access to care, health policy, screening/triage, social determinants of health, staffing, technology/simulation, shared decision making, cross-sectoral collaboration, education, patient-centered care, and research networks. Nonclinical topics were broad in Europe and America, focused on access to care and health screening in Africa, and mostly absent in other WHO regions. Published research priorities in emergency medicine are heterogeneous and geographically limited, mostly containing groups of authors from the same country. The majority of publications in global research priority setting stem from Western countries, covering a broad spectrum of clinical and nonclinical topics. Research priorities from Africa and Asia tend to focus on specific issues more prevalent in those regions of the world.

Trends in visits, imaging, and diagnosis for emergency department abdominal pain presentations in the United States, 2007-2019

OBJECTIVES

Abdominal pain is the most common reason for visit (RFV) to the emergency department (ED) for adults, yet no standardized diagnostic pathway exists for abdominal pain. Optimal management is age-specific; symptoms, diagnoses, and prognoses differ between young and old adults. Availability and knowledge of the effectiveness of various imaging modalities have also changed over time. We compared diagnostic imaging rates for younger versus older adults to identify practice patterns of abdominal imaging across age groups over time.

METHODS

We analyzed weighted, nationally representative data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2007-2019 for adult ED visits with a primary RFV of abdominal pain. We included 23,364 sampled visits, representing 123 million visits.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2019, total visits increased for ages 18-45 (p < 0.001), 46-64 (p < 0.001), and 65+ (p = 0.032). The percentage of visits with primary RFV of abdominal pain increased from 9.4% to 11.6% for ages 18-45, 7.8%-9.0% for ages 46-64, and 6.0%-6.5% for 65+. Computed tomography (CT) scan rates increased over time from 26.2% of all patients receiving a CT scan to 42.6%. Relative percentage change in abdominal CT scans was greatest for older adults, with a 30.3% increase, compared to 24.0% for middle-aged adults and 15.0% for young adults. Test positivity, defined as receiving an emergency general surgical diagnosis after CT or ultrasound, increased from 17.2% in 2007 to 22.9% in 2019 (p < 0.01). Of the older adults with abdominal pain in 2019, 13% received an X-ray only, which is neither sensitive nor specific for acute pathology in older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite more abdominal pain ED visits and increased imaging rates per visit, test positivity continues to rise. Our findings do not support claims that CT and ultrasound are being used less appropriately over time, but demonstrate widespread use of X-rays, which are potentially ineffective for abdominal pain.

The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule

BACKGROUND

Several clinical decision rules have been devised to guide head computed tomography (CT) use in patients with minor head injuries, but none have been validated in patients 65 years or older. We aimed to derive and validate a head injury clinical decision rule for older adults.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of an existing dataset of consecutive emergency department (ED) patients >65 years old with blunt head trauma. The main predictive outcomes were significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention on CT. The secondary outcomes also considered in the model development and validation were All Injuries and All Intracranial Injuries. Predictor variables were identified using multiple variable logistic regression, and clinical decision rule models were developed in a split-sample derivation cohort and then tested in an independent validation cohort.

RESULTS

Of 5776 patients, 233 (4.0%) had significant intracranial injury and an additional 104 (1.8%) met CT criteria for Need for Neurosurgical Intervention. The best performing model, the Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule, assigns points based on several clinical variables. If the points totaled 25 or more, a CT scan is indicated. The included predictors were arrival via Emergency Medical Services (+30 points), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15 (+20 points), GCS <14 (+50 points), antiplatelet medications (+17 points), loss of consciousness (+16 points), signs of basilar skull fracture (+50 points), and headache (+20 points). Utilizing this clinical decision rule in the validation cohort, a point total ≥25 had a sensitivity and specificity of 100.0% (95% CI: 96.0-100) and 12.3% (95% CI: 10.9-13.8), respectively, for significant intracranial injury and Need for Neurosurgical Intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The Florida Geriatric Head Trauma CT Clinical Decision Rule has the potential to reduce unnecessary CT scans in older adults, without compromising safe emergency medicine practice.

Research priority setting in emergency care: A scoping review

Objective

Priority areas for emergency care research are emerging and becoming ever more important. The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) provide a comprehensive overview of published emergency care priority-setting studies by collating and comparing priority-setting methodology and (2) describe the resulting research priorities identified.

Methods

The Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework was used. Inclusion criteria were peer-review articles available in English, published between January 1, 2008 and March 31, 2019 and used 2 or more search terms. Five databases (Scopus, AustHealth, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Ovid MEDLINE) were searched. REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health research (REPRISE) criteria were used to assess the quality of evidence of included articles.

Results

Forty-five studies were included. Fourteen themes for emergency care research were considered within 3 overarching research domains: emergency populations (pediatrics, geriatrics), emergency care workforce and processes (nursing, shared decision making, general workforce, and process), and emergency care clinical areas (imaging, falls, pain management, trauma care, substance misuse, infectious diseases, mental health, cardiology, general clinical care). Variation in the reporting of research priority areas was evident. Priority areas to drive the global agenda for emergency care research are limited given the country and professional group-specific context of existing studies.

Conclusion

This comprehensive summary of generated research priorities across emergency care provides insight into current and future research agendas. With the nature of emergency care being inherently broad, future priorities may warrant population (eg, children, geriatrics) or subspecialty (eg, trauma, toxicology, mental health) focus and be derived using a rigorous framework and patient engagement.

How are Patient Order and Shift Timing Associated With Imaging Choices in the Emergency Department? Evidence From Niagara Health Administrative Data

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We assessed whether the timing and order of patients over emergency shifts are associated with receiving diagnostic imaging in the emergency department and characterized whether changes in imaging are associated with changes in patients returning to the ED.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we used multivariate and instrumental variable regressions to examine how the timing and order of patients are associated with the use of diagnostic imaging. Outcomes include whether a patient receives a radiograph, a computed tomography (CT) scan, an ultrasound, and 7-day bouncebacks to the ED. The variables of interest are time and order during a physician's shift in which a patient is seen.

RESULTS

A total of 841,683 ED visits were examined from an administrative database of all ED visits to Niagara Health. Relative to the first patient, the probability of receiving a radiograph, CT, and ultrasound decreases by 6.4%, 9.1%, and 3.8% if a patient is the 15th patient seen during a shift. Relative to the first minute, the probability of receiving a radiograph, CT, or ultrasound increases by 1.9%, 2.7%, and 1.1% if a patient is seen in the 180th minute. Seven-day bounceback rates are not consistently associated with patient order or timing in a shift and imaging orders.

CONCLUSION

Imaging in the ED is associated with shift length and especially patient order, suggesting that physicians make different imaging decisions over the course of their shifts. Additional imaging does not translate into reductions in subsequent bouncebacks to the hospital.

A Systematic Review of Interventions to Reduce Computed Tomography Usage in the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Unnecessary computed tomography (CT) scans burden the health care system, leading to increased emergency department (ED) wait times and lengths of stay, costing almost a billion dollars annually. This study aimed to describe ED-based interventions that are most effective at reducing CT imaging while maintaining diagnostic accuracy and patient safety.

METHODS

Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched until December 31, 2020. Randomized and nonrandomized studies that assessed the effect of an ED-based intervention on CT scan usage were included. Abstract screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted in duplicate. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework, with the Risk of Bias 2 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions tools, was used to determine the certainty of evidence. Significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis; hence, a narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 149 studies were included of 5,667 screened abstracts, with substantial interrater reliability among reviewers (Cohen's κ>0.60). The CT reduction strategies were categorized into 15 single and 11 multimodal interventions by consensus review. Interventions that consistently reduced CT usage included diagnostic pathways, alternative test availability, specialist involvement, and provider feedback. Family/patient education, clinical decision support tools, or passive guideline dissemination did not consistently reduce usage. Only 44% of studies reported unintended consequences of reduction strategies; however, these showed no increase in missed diagnoses or patient harm. The interventions that engaged multiple specialties during planning/implementation had a greater reduction effect than ED only. The certainty of evidence for the primary outcome was very low.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary-led interventions that provided an alternative to CT imaging were the most effective at reducing usage and did so without compromising patient safety.

Clinical Decision Rules in the Evaluation and Management of Adult Gastrointestinal Emergencies

Although abdominal pain is a common chief complaint in the emergency department, only 1 in 6 patients with abdominal pain are diagnosed with a gastrointestinal (GI) emergency. These patients often undergo extensive testing as well as hospitalizations to rule out an acute GI emergency and there is evidence that not all patients benefit from such management. Several clinical decision rules (CDRs) have been developed for the diagnosis and management of patients with suspected acute appendicitis and upper GI bleeding to identify those patients who may safely forgo further testing or hospital admission. Further validation studies demonstrating the superiority of these CDRs over contemporary practice are needed.

Radiology Education Among Emergency Medicine Residencies: A National Needs Assessment

Introduction

Radiology training is an important component of emergency medicine (EM) education, but its delivery has been variable. Program directors have reported a lack of radiology skills in incoming interns. A needs assessment is a crucial first step toward improving radiology education among EM residencies. Our objective was to explore the current state of radiology education in EM residency programs.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional survey study of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited EM programs in the United States. Program leadership completed an online survey consisting of multiple choice, Likert scale, and free-response items. We calculated and reported descriptive statistics.

Results

Of eligible EM programs, 142/252 (56%) completed the survey including 105 postgraduate year (PGY) 1–3 and 36 PGY 1–4 programs. One respondent opted out of answering demographic questions. 23/141 (16%) were from the Western region, 29/141 (21%) were from the North Central region, 14/141 (10%) were from the South-Central region, 28/141 (20%) were from the Southeast region, and 47/141 (33%) were from the Northeast region. A total of 88/142 (62%) of responding programs did not have formal radiology instruction. Of the education that is provided, 127/142 (89%) provide it via didactics/lectures and 115/142 (81%) rely on instruction during clinical shifts. Only 51/142 (36%) provide asynchronous opportunities, and 23/142 (16%) have a dedicated radiology rotation. The majority of respondents reported spending 0–2 hours per month on radiology instruction (108/142; 76%); 95/141 (67%) reported that EM faculty “often” or “always” provide radiology instruction; 134/142 (95%), felt that it was “extremely” or “very important” for ED providers to be able to independently interpret radiograph results; and 129/142 (90.84%) either “sometimes” or “always” rely on their independent radiograph interpretations to make clinical decisions. The radiology studies identified as most important to be able to independently interpret were radiographs obtained for lines/tubes, chest radiographs, and radiographs obtained for musculoskeletal-related complaints.

Conclusion

A minority of EM residency programs have formal instruction in radiology despite the majority of responding program leadership believing that these are important skills. The most important curricular areas were identified. These results may inform the development of formal radiology curricula in EM graduate medical education.

Awareness of relative CT utilization among peers is not associated with changes in imaging requests among emergency department providers in a large county hospital

PURPOSE

The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to study the effect of providing scorecards to emergency department providers to assess its effect on changes in utilization.

METHODS

CT of the abdomen and pelvis, CT angiogram of the chest for pulmonary embolism, and CT of the head were targeted due to ordering variability, cost, and radiation exposure. The utilization rate for each provider was assessed for emergency department providers. Following this, providers were given scorecards regarding their utilization as well as their relative utilization compared with each other. Utilization was then monitored following the intervention to assess the effect of the scorecard on ordering practices.

RESULTS

No significant effect on the utilization of these 3 exams was found after the scorecard intervention.

CONCLUSION

Providing scorecards to make emergency department providers aware of their relative utilization does not significantly alter ordering behavior. Incentive-based systems may be required in order to lessen overutilization of these 3 commonly ordered radiology procedures in the emergency department.