Interprofessional Education of Emergency Department Team on Falls in Older Adults

Core requirements of frailty screening in the emergency department: an international Delphi consensus study

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study.

METHODS

A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors.

RESULTS

In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

Frailty Knowledge, Use of Screening Tools, and Educational Challenges in Emergency Departments in Ireland: A Multisite Survey

BACKGROUND

Recognizing frailty and providing evidenced-based management in busy emergency departments is challenging. Understanding the knowledge and educational needs of ED staff is important to design training that might improve patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore frailty knowledge of ED staff, use of frailty screening instruments in Irish emergency departments, and educational challenges in the emergency department.

METHODS

A multisite survey of ED staff (different specialties) was conducted between April and September 2021. An anonymous online survey was distributed via email. Free-text sections were analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 168 staff (nursing, medical and allied health) participated, representing 9 of 26 Irish emergency departments (35%). Most respondents were nurses (n = 78, 46%). Less than half of respondents had received frailty identification training (n = 81, 48%). One-fifth of emergency doctors and nurses (20%) were unsure how to define frailty. Major barriers to ED frailty screening were resource deficits, insufficient diagnostic pathways from the emergency departments, and lack of education on suitable instruments.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the ED staff surveyed relied on clinical judgment rather than formal training in frailty identification. A high proportion reported poor knowledge and low confidence in recognizing frailty. Dedicated staff with frailty management expertise, bespoke education initiatives, and clearly defined frailty screening pathways may help address the issues identified.

The Application of Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Model in the Assessment of Interprofessional Simulation Activities Involving Pharmacy Students: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To our knowledge, this systematic review is the first to assess pharmacy-involved interprofessional education (IPE) simulation activities in establishing current methodological effectiveness using Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Model. This is a training evaluative model that assesses educational training activities according to 4 levels: reaction, learning, behavior, and results.

FINDINGS

From the 3108 studies retrieved, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies achieved levels 1 and 2 of Kirkpatrick's Evaluation Model, and 1 achieved level 3. One study only achieved level 1. Single-group, pre- and posttest studies were the most common study designs (n = 9), and 1 study followed a longitudinal approach. IPE duration ranged from 45 min to 5 days, and most of the studies were conducted in the United States (n = 10). Most studies alluded to an underpinning theory behind IPE simulation design and chose surveys as their mode of data collection.

SUMMARY

The most common limitation reported was the uneven representation of professions and a lack of data on the studies' effect in practice. To demonstrate the achievement of outcomes in relation to levels 3 and 4, there is a need for longitudinal studies of IPE simulation activities. Although evaluative studies showed a positive response to IPE simulation at a basic level, there is a lack of effective integration of theory behind IPE design. Future studies need to consider this when setting the infrastructure of IPE design, as well as making efforts to mobilize stakeholders in the workplace to help facilitate transfer of learning.