Patient perspectives on priorities for emergency medicine research: The <scp>PERSPEX</scp> study

McLay, Stuart V B; McCutcheon, David; Arendts, Glenn; Macdonald, Stephen; Fatovich, Daniel M

doi:10.1111/1742-6723.12844

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Centre for Clinical Research in Emergency Medicine (CCREM) has previously involved ED patients in setting research priorities. We found that ED patients chose priorities that were consistent with ACEM researchers, but patients also suggested alternative directions for future research . In preparation for future funding applications, CCREM researchers worked with The Consumer and Community Health Research Network (CCHRN) to host a community conversation about sepsis.…”

Section: Consumer Involvement Challenges In Emergency Medicine Researchmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…One of the best examples of this includes involving those with personal experience of a health condition in formulating outcomes for clinical trials. Public contributors can also help to steer future research priorities, assist with grant applications and the dissemination of results . In 2002 the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Consumer Health Forum jointly released an initial statement setting out their position .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consumer involvement in emergency medicine research: Lessons from engaging sepsis survivors

Sills

Macdonald

Williams

et al. 2020

Emerg Medicine Australasia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaboration with consumers is an emerging focus for medical researchers worldwide. Public involvement is increasingly encouraged, and in some cases stipulated by funding bodies, in order to secure financial support. While consumer involvement could be viewed as another hurdle in the funding application process, it can add immense value to research outcomes. However, given the diverse and transient nature of our consumer group, how can we develop meaningful public engagement in emergency medicine research?

show abstract

Section: Consumer Involvement Challenges In Emergency Medicine Researchmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer involvement in emergency medicine research: Lessons from engaging sepsis survivors

Sills

Macdonald

Williams

et al. 2020

Emerg Medicine Australasia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Care of the older person in the emergency department (ED) is a priority area for emergency care research from the perspectives of emergency physicians in the UK [ 1 ] and Australia [ 2 , 3 ], and ED patients [ 4 ]. The need to prioritise the care of older person is underpinned by several challenges including an ageing population (which is evident in every country in the world) [ 5 ] and over-representation of older people in the ED [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The epidemiology of dying within 48 hours of presentation to emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study of older people across Australia and New Zealand

Sweeny,

Alsaba,

Grealish

et al. 2024

Age and Ageing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Emergency department (ED) clinicians are more frequently providing care, including end-of-life care, to older people. Objectives To estimate the need for ED end-of-life care for people aged ≥65 years, describe characteristics of those dying within 48 hours of ED presentation and compare those dying in ED with those dying elsewhere. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study analysing data from 177 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Data on older people presenting to ED from January to December 2018, and those who died within 48 hours of ED presentation, were analysed using simple descriptive statistics and univariate logistic regression. Results From participating hospitals in Australia or New Zealand, 10,921 deaths in older people occurred. The 48-hour mortality rate was 6.43 per 1,000 ED presentations (95% confidence interval: 6.31–6.56). Just over a quarter (n = 3,067, 28.1%) died in ED. About one-quarter of the cohort (n = 2,887, 26.4%) was triaged into less urgent triage categories. Factors with an increased risk of dying in ED included age 65–74 years, ambulance arrival, most urgent triage categories, principal diagnosis of circulatory system disorder, and not identifying as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person. Of the 7,677 older people admitted, half (n = 3,836, 50.0%) had an encounter for palliative care prior to, or during, this presentation. Conclusions Our findings provide insight into the challenges of recognising the dying older patient and differentiating those appropriate for end-of-life care. We support recommendations for national advanced care planning registers and suggest a review of triage systems with an older person-focused lens.

show abstract

Research priority setting in emergency care: A scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Patient perspectives on priorities for emergency medicine research: The PERSPEX study

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

Consumer involvement in emergency medicine research: Lessons from engaging sepsis survivors

Consumer involvement in emergency medicine research: Lessons from engaging sepsis survivors

The epidemiology of dying within 48 hours of presentation to emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study of older people across Australia and New Zealand

Research priority setting in emergency care: A scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About