Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
Research networks can enable the inclusion of large, diverse patient populations in different settings. However, the optimal measures of a research network's failure or success are not well defined or standardized. To define a framework for metrics used to measure the performance and effectiveness of emergency care research networks (ECRN), a conference for emergency care investigators, funding agencies, patient advocacy groups, and other stakeholders was held and yielded the following major recommendations: 1) ECRN metrics should be measurable, explicitly defined, and customizable for the multiple stakeholders involved and 2) continuing to develop and institute metrics to evaluate ECRNs will be critical for their accountability and sustainability.
-
This prospective observational study was performed to investigate if the hand position used for external chest compressions is in an optimal position for compressing the ventricles during standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). ⋯ The outflow of the left ventricle is affected during standard CPR, resulting in varying degrees of narrowing in the LVOT and/or the aortic root.
-
The ability of emergency care research (ECR) to produce meaningful improvements in the outcomes of acutely ill or injured patients depends on the optimal configuration, infrastructure, organization, and support of emergency care research networks (ECRNs). Through the experiences of existing ECRNs, we can learn how to best accomplish this. A meeting was organized in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2008, to discuss the present state and future directions of clinical research networks as they relate to emergency care. ⋯ The most commonly cited weaknesses were studies with too narrow a focus and restrictive inclusion criteria, a vast organizational structure with a risk of either too much or too little central organization or control, and heterogeneity of institutional policies and procedures among sites. Through the survey and structured discussion process involving multiple stakeholders, the authors have identified strengths and weaknesses that are consistent across a number of existing ECRNs. By leveraging the strengths and addressing the weaknesses, strategies can be adopted to enhance the scientific value and productivity of these networks and give direction to future ECRNs.
-
Emergency care research (ECR) does not fit neatly into the traditional National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding model, because emergency research involves undifferentiated disease presentations involving multiple disciplines and time-sensitive interventions. A task force of emergency care researchers and other stakeholders was convened to discuss the present and future state of clinical research networks. ⋯ Strategies to enhance integration must include the training of emergency physician investigators in biostatistical and epidemiologic methods, as well as educating collaborative investigators in emergency care-related methodologies. Thus, an ECRN would be of great benefit to CTSA awardees and applicants and should be considered a priority.
-
The objective was to quantify the expansion of midlevel provider (MLP) practice in U.S. emergency departments (EDs) over the past decade. Specifically, we sought to quantify the absolute number of patients seen by MLPs, the annual growth rate of patients seen by MLPs, and the expansion in the proportion of EDs using MLPs. ⋯ The number of ED patients seen by MLPs has increased sharply, from 5.2 million in 1997 (5.5% of all ED cases) to 15.2 million in 2006 (12.7% of all ED cases). Similarly, the proportion of EDs reporting use of MLPs has increased from 28.3% in 1997 to 77.2% in 2006.