Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Multicenter Study
Association of Hospital Resources and Imaging Choice for Appendicitis in Pediatric Emergency Departments.
Abdominal pain and concern for appendicitis are common chief complaints in patients presenting to the pediatric emergency department (PED). Although many professional organizations recommend decreasing use of computed tomography (CT) and choosing ultrasound as first-line imaging for pediatric appendicitis, significant variability persists in imaging utilization. This study investigated practice variation across children's hospitals in the diagnostic imaging evaluation of appendicitis and determined hospital-level characteristics associated with the likelihood of ultrasound as the first imaging modality. ⋯ Across children's hospitals, significant practice variation exists regarding diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of patients with appendicitis. Variation in hospital-level resources may impact the diagnostic evaluation of patients with appendicitis. Availability of 24-hour in-house ultrasound significantly increases the likelihood of ultrasound as first imaging and decreases CT scans. Hospitals aiming to increase the use of ultrasound should consider adding 24-hour in-house coverage.
-
Loss to follow-up of enrolled patients (a.k.a. attrition) is a major threat to study validity and power. Minimizing attrition can be challenging even under ideal research conditions, including the presence of adequate funding, experienced study personnel, and a refined research infrastructure. ⋯ The seven areas of approach to minimize attrition in this study focused on patient selection, baseline contact data collection, patient incentives, patient tracking, central phone banks, local enrollment site assistance, and continuous performance monitoring. Appropriate study design, including consideration of these methods to reduce attrition, will be time well spent and may improve study validity.
-
Administrative claims data sets are often used for emergency care research and policy investigations of healthcare resource utilization, acute care practices, and evaluation of quality improvement interventions. Despite the high profile of emergency department (ED) visits in analyses using administrative claims, little work has evaluated the degree to which existing definitions based on claims data accurately captures conventionally defined hospital-based ED services. We sought to construct an operational definition for ED visitation using a comprehensive Medicare data set and to compare this definition to existing operational definitions used by researchers and policymakers. ⋯ Current operational definitions of ED visitation using administrative claims produce different estimates of ED visitation based on the underlying assumptions applied to billing data and data set availability. Future analyses using administrative claims data should seek to validate specific definitions and inform the development of a consistent, consensus ED visitation definitions to standardize research reporting and the interpretation of policy interventions.
-
There is a lack of information on annual healthcare expenditures both per person and for the U.S. population associated with trauma, as identified by International Classification of Disease Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes. ⋯ Clinicians should be aware that individuals in the U.S. population with certain comorbidities such as stroke, joint pain, arthritis, and asthma are more likely to have trauma and that differences exist in expenditures for office-based, outpatient, dental, and the ED.
-
The objective was to describe characteristics of civil monetary penalty settlements levied by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) against individual physicians related to violation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). ⋯ For emergency physicians, a civil monetary penalty is a feared consequence of EMTALA enforcement, as a physician can be held individually liable for fine of up to $50,000 not covered by malpractice insurance. Although EMTALA is an actively enforced law, and violation of the EMTALA statute often results in hospital citations and fines, and occasionally facility closure, we found that individual physicians are rarely penalized by the OIG following EMTALA violation. Individual physician penalties are far less common than hospital citations or fines related to EMTALA or malpractice claims or payments. The majority of penalties against individual physicians were levied upon on-call specialists who refused to evaluate and treat ED patients. Only one emergency physician was fined during the study period for a clear violation of the EMTALA statute. Physicians should be diligent to ensure appropriate patient care and that facilities are compliant with the EMTALA statute, but should be aware that settlements against individual physicians are a rare consequence of EMTALA enforcement.