Annals of emergency medicine
-
Although emergency departments (EDs) play an integral role in the delivery of acute unscheduled care, they have not been fully integrated into broader health care reform efforts. Communication and coordination with the ambulatory environment remain limited, leaving ED care disconnected from patients' longitudinal care. ⋯ When integrated with primary and subspecialty care, emergency care might meet the needs of patients, providers, and payers more efficiently than yet realized. This article uses the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System from the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act as a framework to outline a strategy for improving the value of emergency care, including integrating quality and resource use measures across health care delivery settings and populations, encouraging care coordination from the ED, and implementing robust health information exchange systems.
-
Policymakers increasingly regard centralization of emergency care as a useful measure to improve quality. However, the clinical studies that are used to justify centralization, arguing that volume indicators are a good proxy for quality of care ("practice makes perfect"), have significant shortcomings. In light of the introduction of a new centralization policy in the Netherlands, we show that the use of volume indicators in emergency care is problematic and does not do justice to the daily care provided in emergency departments (EDs). ⋯ The first repertoire of acute and complex care might benefit from centralization. The other 3 repertoires, however, equally deserve attention but are made invisible in policies that focus on the first repertoire and extrapolate the idea of centralization to emergency care as a whole. Emergency care research and policies should take all repertoires into account and pay more attention to alternative measures and indicators beyond volume, eg, patient satisfaction, professional expertise, and collaboration between EDs and other facilities.
-
Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism, and emergency physicians can play a significant role in addressing one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in this patient population. However, there are no comprehensive guidelines addressing the approach to cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in the emergency department. Here, we review the guidelines put forth by various national and international cancer societies and highlight how emergency physicians can help institute appropriate treatment and prevent the recurrence of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. We also address areas of controversy and highlight topics that require further research.