Acceptability of older patients' self-assessment in the Emergency Department (ACCEPTED)-a randomised cross-over pilot trial

Experiences of the emergency department environment: a qualitative study with caregivers of people with dementia

ED crowding and boarding adversely impact older patients' care and outcomes. Little is known about how ED crowding impacts persons living with dementia, a vulnerable population. This study sought to explore ED experiences of caregivers of people with dementia during a period of ED crowding and boarding. We performed semi-structured interviews with caregivers of people with dementia with an ED visit during a period of ED crowding and boarding at two public hospitals experiencing a threefold increase in boarding from pre-pandemic levels. Participants were recruited via chart review. We coded data using an inductive approach. Three themes emerged from 29 caregiver interviews: (1) difficulty obtaining assistance, (2) patient harms, and (3) concerns about triage and rooming processes. First, caregivers described having to be proactive to obtain symptom control and assistance with mobility. Second, caregivers observed harms of noise and stimulation provoking agitation and delays in administration of routine medications. Third, caregivers felt it was inappropriate for people with dementia to receive care in waiting room chairs or to receive prolonged hallway care. Caregivers advocated for preferential considerations for rooming and rapid assessment to avoid agitation, facilitatd access to ED staff, and promote patient comfort. Caregivers of people with dementia associated ED environments with difficulty obtaining assistance, patient harms, and triage concerns. Strategies to mitigate the negative impacts of ED crowding on people with dementia should focus on environmental modifications, uptriage of people with dementia, supporting activities of daily living and mobility, and innovation around patient disposition.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing psychosocial digital health interventions for older adults presenting to emergency departments: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Older adults can face challenges when seeking care from emergency departments (EDs) due to presenting with multiple comorbidities and non-specific symptoms. Psychosocial care is a possible target to help improve ED care for this population. It is possible that digital health technologies can be implemented within emergency settings to improve the provision of psychosocial care. However, it is unclear what the barriers and facilitators are to implementing digital psychosocial interventions for older adults presenting to the ED. Therefore, the scoping review aims to determine what are these barriers and facilitators.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The scoping review will be conducted in line with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and will use the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The databases Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Scopus will be searched. The search strategy will be developed in consultation with a specialist research librarian and will cover three key concepts: EDs, digital health technologies and older adults. Additionally, the first 100 hits of a Google Scholar search will be screened for inclusion. We will include both qualitative and quantitative studies that investigate ED digital interventions for psychosocial care where the primary focus is the views, attitudes, experiences and perceptions of patients, families and staff. After extracting all data, analysis and synthesis will follow the 'best-fit framework synthesis' approach and the Theoretical Domains Framework will be used to identify barriers and facilitators.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review since only publicly available data will be analysed and appraised. The findings of the scoping review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

Strategies to improve care for older adults who present to the emergency department: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between strategies to improve care delivery for older adults in ED and evaluation measures of patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, and system performance.

METHODS

A systematic review of English language studies published since inception to December 2022, available from CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and Scopus was conducted. Studies were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers and included if they met the following criteria: participant mean age of ≥ 65 years; ED setting or directly influenced provision of care in the ED; reported on improvement interventions and strategies; reported patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, or system performance. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by pairs of independent reviewers using The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Data were synthesised using a hermeneutic approach.

RESULTS

Seventy-six studies were included in the review, incorporating strategies for comprehensive assessment and multi-faceted care (n = 32), targeted care such as management of falls risk, functional decline, or pain management (n = 27), medication safety (n = 5), and trauma care (n = 12). We found a misalignment between comprehensive care delivered in ED for older adults and ED performance measures oriented to rapid assessment and referral. Eight (10.4%) studies reported patient experience and five (6.5%) reported staff experience.

CONCLUSION

It is crucial that future strategies to improve care delivery in ED align the needs of older adults with the purpose of the ED system to ensure sustainable improvement effort and critical functioning of the ED as an interdependent component of the health system. Staff and patient input at the design stage may advance prioritisation of higher-impact interventions aligned with the pace of change and illuminate experience measures. More consistent reporting of interventions would inform important contextual factors and allow for replication.

Frailty assessment tools in the emergency department: A geriatric emergency department guidelines 2.0 scoping review

Objective

Given the aging population and growing burden of frailty, we conducted this scoping review to describe the available literature regarding the use and impact of frailty assessment tools in the assessment and care of emergency department (ED) patients older than 60 years.

Methods

A search was made of the available literature using the Covidence system using various search terms. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed literature focusing on frailty screening tools used for a geriatric population (60+ years of age) presenting to EDs. An additional search of PubMed, EBSCO, and CINAHL for articles published in the last 5 years was conducted toward the end of the review process (January 2023) to search specifically for literature describing interventions for frailty, yielding additional articles for review. Exclusion criteria comprised articles focusing on an age category other than geriatric and care environments outside the emergency care setting.

Results

A total of 135 articles were screened for inclusion and 48 duplicates were removed. Of the 87 remaining articles, 20 were deemed irrelevant, leaving 67 articles for full-text review. Twenty-eight were excluded for not meeting inclusion criteria, leaving 39 full-text studies. Use of frailty screening tools were reported in the triage, care, and discharge decision-making phases of the ED care trajectory, with varying reports of usefulness for clinical decision-making.

Conclusion

The literature reports tools, scales, and instruments for identifying frailty in older patients at ED triage; multiple frailty scores or tools exist with varying levels of utilization. Interventions for frailty directed at the ED environment were scant. Further research is needed to determine the usefulness of frailty identification in the context of emergency care, the effects of care delivery interventions or educational initiatives for front-line medical professionals on patient-oriented outcomes, and to ensure these initiatives are acceptable for patients.

From research to daily clinical practice: implementation of orthogeriatric co-management in the trauma ward

Introduction

Evidence strongly suggests that orthogeriatric co-management improves patient outcomes in frail older patients with a fracture, but evidence regarding how to implement this model of care in daily clinical practice is scarce. In this paper, we first describe the implementation process and selection of implementation strategies for an orthogeriatric co-management program in the traumatology ward of the University Hospitals Leuven in Belgium. Second, we report the results of a multi-method feasibility study. This study (1) measures the fidelity towards the program's core components, (2) quantifies the perceived feasibility and acceptability by the healthcare professionals, and (3) defines implementation determinants.

Methods

Implementation strategies were operationalized based on the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) guidelines. In the feasibility study, fidelity towards the core components of the program was measured in a group of 15 patients aged 75 years and over by using electronic health records. Feasibility and acceptability as perceived by the involved healthcare professionals was measured using a 15-question survey with a 5-point Likert scale. Implementation determinants were mapped thematically based on seven focus group discussions and two semi-structured interviews by focusing on the healthcare professionals' experiences.

Results

We observed low fidelity towards completion of a screening questionnaire to map the premorbid situation (13%), but high fidelity towards the other program core components: multidimensional evaluation (100%), development of an individual care plan (100%), and systematic follow-up (80%). Of the 50 survey respondents, 94% accepted the program and 62% perceived it as feasible. Important implementation determinants were feasibility, awareness and familiarity, and improved communication between healthcare professionals that positively influenced program adherence.

Conclusions

Fidelity, acceptability, and feasibility of an orthogeriatric co-management program were high as a result of an iterative process of selecting implementation strategies with intensive stakeholder involvement from the beginning.

Clinical trial registration

[https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN20491828], International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry: [ISRCTN20491828]. Registered on October 11, 2021.

Clinical Acuity in the Emergency Department and Injury Severity Determine Hospital Admission of Older Patients with Low Energy Falls: Outcomes from a Prospective Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Low energy falls (LEF) in older adults constitute a relevant cause for emergency department (ED) visits, hospital admission and in-hospital mortality. Patient-reported outcome measures containing information about patients' medical, mental and social health problems might support disposition and therapy decisions. We investigated the value of a tablet-based (self-)assessment in predicting hospital admission and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

Patients 65 years or older, consecutively presenting with LEF to our level I trauma center ED (from November 2020 to March 2021), were eligible for inclusion in this prospective observational study. The primary endpoint was hospital admission; secondary endpoints were in-hospital mortality and the use of the tablet for self-reported assessment. Multivariate logistic regression models were calculated to measure the association between clinical findings and endpoints.

RESULTS

Of 618 eligible patients, 201 patients were included. The median age was 82 years (62.7% women). The hospital admission rate was 45.3% (110/201), with an in-hospital mortality rate of 3.6% (4/110). Polypharmacy (odds ratio (OR): 8.48; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.21-59.37, p = 0.03), lower emergency severity index (ESI) scores (OR: 0.33; 95%CI 0.17-0.64, p = 0.001) and increasing injury severity score (ISS) (OR: 1.54; 95%CI 1.32-1.79, p < 0.001) were associated with hospital admission. The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR: 2.60; 95%CI: 1.17-5.81, p = 0.03). Increasing age (OR: 0.94; 95%CI: 0.89-0.99, p = 0.03) and frailty (OR: 0.71; 95%CI: 0.51-0.99, p = 0.04) were associated with the incapability of tablet use.

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of fall-related injuries and the clinical acuity are easily accessible, relevant predictors for hospital admission. Tablet-based (self-)assessment may be feasible and acceptable during ED visits and might help facilitate comprehensive geriatric assessments during ED stay.

Frailty assessment in emergency medicine using the Clinical Frailty Scale: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Frailty is a common condition present in older Emergency Department (ED) patients that is associated with poor health outcomes. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a tool that measures frailty on a scale from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill). The goal of this scoping review was to describe current use of the CFS in emergency medicine and to identify gaps in research.

METHODS

We performed a systemic literature search to identify original research that used the CFS in emergency medicine. Several databases were searched from January 2005 to July 2021. Two independent reviewers completed screening, full text review and data abstraction, with a focus on study characteristics, CFS assessment (evaluators, timing and purpose), study outcomes and statistical methods.

RESULTS

A total of 4818 unique citations were identified; 34 studies were included in the final analysis. Among them, 76% were published after 2018, mainly in Europe or North America (79%). Only two assessed CFS in the pre-hospital setting. The nine-point scale was used in 74% of the studies, and patient consent was required in 69% of them. The main reason to use CFS was as a main exposure (44%), a potential predictor (15%) or an outcome (15%). The most frequently studied outcomes were mortality and hospital admission.

CONCLUSION

The use of CFS in emergency medicine research is drastically increasing. However, the reporting is not optimal and should be more standardized. Studies evaluating the impact of frailty assessment in the ED are needed.

REGISTRATION

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W2F8N.

Detecting Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

To identify research and practice gaps to establish future research priorities to advance the detection of cognitive impairment and dementia in the emergency department (ED).

DESIGN

Literature review and consensus-based rankings by a transdisciplinary, stakeholder task force of experts, persons living with dementia, and care partners.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Scoping reviews focused on adult ED patients.

METHODS

Two systematic scoping reviews of 7 medical research databases focusing on best tools and approaches for detecting cognitive impairment and dementia in the ED in terms of (1) most accurate and (2) most pragmatic to implement. The results were screened, reviewed, and abstracted for relevant information and presented at the stakeholder consensus conference for discussion and ranked prioritization.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 1464 publications and included 45 to review for accurate tools and approaches for detecting cognitive impairment and dementia. Twenty-seven different assessments and instruments have been studied in the ED setting to evaluate cognitive impairment and dementia, with many focusing on sensitivity and specificity of instruments to screen for cognitive impairment. For pragmatic tools, we identified a total of 2166 publications and included 66 in the review. Most extensively studied tools included the Ottawa 3DY and Six-Item Screener (SIS). The SIS was the shortest to administer (1 minute). Instruments with the highest negative predictive value were the SIS (vs MMSE) and the 4 A's Test (vs expert diagnosis). The GEAR 2.0 Advancing Dementia Care Consensus conference ranked research priorities that included the need for more approaches to recognize more effectively and efficiently persons who may be at risk for cognitive impairment and dementia, while balancing the importance of equitable screening, purpose, and consequences of differentiating various forms of cognitive impairment.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The scoping review and consensus process identified gaps in clinical care that should be prioritized for research efforts to detect cognitive impairment and dementia in the ED setting. These gaps will be addressed as future GEAR 2.0 research funding priorities.

Self-assessment of functional status in older emergency department patients: a cross-over randomized pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the inter-rater reliability and feasibility of the self-assessed Older Americans Resources and Services scale compared to its administration by a research assistant in older Emergency Department (ED) patients.

METHOD

This is a planned sub-analysis of a single-center randomized cross-over pilot study. A convenience sample of ED patients aged ≥ 65 was constituted at the CHU de Québec-Université Laval (Hôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus) between 2018/05 and 2018/07. Research assistants assessed participants' functional status using the Older Americans Resources and Services scale and patients self-assessed using a modified Older Americans Resources and Services scale. Test administration order was randomized. The main outcome, inter-rater reliability, was measured using intraclass correlation (ICC). Feasibility was measured using self-assessment completion rate.

RESULTS

67 patients were included and 60 completed self-assessment. Mean age was 74.4 ± 7.6 and 34 (56.7%) participants were women. Mean research assistant-assessed Older Americans Resources and Services scale score was 25.1 ± 3.3, while mean self-assessed Older Americans Resources and Services scale score was 26.4 ± 2.5 [ICC: 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7-0.9)]. Mean activities of daily living scores were 12.5 ± 1.8 for research assistant assessment and 13.5 ± 0.9 for self-assessment [ICC: 0.6 (95% CI: 0.4-0.7)]. Mean instrumental activities of daily living scores were 12.6 ± 1.8 and 12.9 ± 1.8 for research assistant assessment and self-assessment, respectively [ICC: 0.9 (95% CI: 0.8-0.9)].

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that self-assessment of functional status by older ED patients is feasible, and good-to-moderate inter-rater reliability results were obtained. A self-assessed score may identify patients in need of further geriatric/functional assessment who may otherwise have been left unscreened.