Synopsis An increasing number of emergency departments (EDs) are providing extended care and monitoring of patients in ED observation units (EDOUs). EDOUs can be particularly useful for older adults both as an alternative to hospitalization in appropriately selected patients and as a means to risk-stratify older adults with unclear presentations. They can also provide a period of therapeutic intervention and reassessment for older patients in whom the appropriateness and safety of immediate outpatient care is unclear. They offer the opportunity for more comprehensive evaluation of many characteristics of particular importance to the care of older adults which cannot be accomplished during a short ED stay. The manuscript first discusses the general characteristics of EDOUs. Next, it reviews appropriate entry and exclusion criteria for older adults in EDOU including specific focus on several of the most common observation unit protocols, focusing on their relevance to older adults. Finally, it briefly discusses regulatory implications of observation status for patients with Medicare.

IntroductionPress Ganey (PG) scores are used by public entities to gauge the quality of patient care from medical facilities in the United States. Academic health centers (AHCs) are charged with educating the new generation of doctors, but rely heavily on PG scores for their business operation. AHCs need to know what impact medical student involvement has on patient care and their PG scores.PurposeWe sought to identify the impact students have on emergency department (ED) PG scores related to overall visit and the treating physician’s performance.MethodsThis was a retrospective, observational cohort study of discharged ED patients who completed PG satisfaction surveys at one academic, and one community-based ED. Outcomes were responses to questions about the overall visit assessment and doctor’s care, measured on a five-point scale. We compared the distribution of responses for each question through proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) stratified by medical student participation. For each question, we constructed a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model including medical student involvement and other independent variables known to affect PG scores.ResultsWe analyzed 2,753 encounters, of which 259 (9.4%) had medical student involvement. For all questions, there were no appreciable differences in patient responses when stratifying by medical student involvement. In regression models, medical student involvement was not associated with PG score for any outcome, including overall rating of care (odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% CI [0.90–1.34]) or likelihood of recommending our EDs (OR 1.07, 95% CI [0.86–1.32]). Findings were similar when each ED was analyzed individually.ConclusionWe found that medical student involvement in patient care did not adversely impact ED PG scores in discharged patients. Neither overall scores nor physician-specific scores were impacted. Results were similar at both the academic medical center and the community teaching hospital at our institution.

Objectives: The Emergency Severity Index (ESI) is a prospectively validated, five-level emergency department (ED) triage system designed to match triage acuity to both patient acuity and appropriate resource allocation. The study hypothesis was that, in practice, there exists an inappropriate bias toward triaging patients with abdominal pain to a higher ESI level based solely upon their mode of arrival to the ED. Methods:The authors performed a retrospective case-control study of patients presenting with abdominal pain. Patients were matched on sex, age (±5 years), and date of arrival. Cases were those patients triaged to a Level 2, and controls were those triaged as Level 3. Conditional multiple variable logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of the following variables on the odds of being triaged as Level 2: mode of arrival, systolic blood pressure (<90 mm Hg; normal, >140 mm Hg), heart rate, severe pain score ( ‡8 of 10), fever, race, history of cancer, and previous abdominal surgery. Age was also included in the regression modeling to confirm that matching was adequate. One-hundred cases and 100 controls were necessary to provide adequate sample size. A backward modeling technique was used, requiring a p < 0.05 for retention.Results: Of the 200 subjects, 52 arrived by emergency medical services (EMS) and 148 walked in. After matching for sex, age, and date of arrival, and after adjusting for heart rate, cancer diagnosis, and severe pain, the odds ratio (OR) for being triaged ESI Level 2 was 7.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75 to 18.8, p < 0.0001) for EMS patients compared to walk-in patients. The admission rate for Level 2 patients was not different from that of Level 3 patients (49% vs. 35% of Level 3 patients, p = 0.06), but EMS patients were more likely to be admitted, regardless of ESI level assignment (65% vs. 34%, p < 0.001).Conclusions: After adjusting for covariates, EMS patients with abdominal pain were more likely to be triaged to a higher acuity level. Triage level was not associated with admission, but patients arriving by EMS were more likely to be admitted. This may indicate that the effect of EMS arrival on triage level assignment is actually appropriate. Further research is necessary to validate whether mode of arrival should be incorporated in the initial ESI triage acuity assignment.