Yazdanyar Ali, Greenberg Megan R, Chen Zhe, Li Shuisen, Greenberg Marna Rayl, Buonanno Anthony P, Burmeister David B, Jarjous Shadi
Lehigh Valley Health Network Department of Emergency and Hospital Medicine/USF Morsani College of Medicine Bethlehem Pennsylvania USA.
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2022 Jul 30;3(4):e12783. doi: 10.1002/emp2.12783. eCollection 2022 Aug.
Patient crowding and boarding in the emergency department (ED) is associated with adverse outcomes and has become increasingly problematic in recent years. We investigated the impact of an ED patient flow countermeasure using an early warning score.
We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of observational data from patients who presented to the ED of a Level 1 Trauma Center in Pennsylvania. We implemented a modified version of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), called mMEWS, to address patient flow. Patients aged ≥18 years old admitted to the adult hospital medicine service were included in the study. We compared the pre-mMEWS (February 19, 2017-February 18, 2019) to the post-mMEWS implementation period (February 19, 2019-June 30, 2020). During the intervention, low MEWS (0-1) scoring admissions went directly to the inpatient floor with expedited orders, the remainder waited in the ED until the hospital medicine admitting team evaluated the patient and then placed orders. We investigated the association between mMEWS, ED length of stay (LOS), and 24-hour rapid response team (24 hour-RRT) activation. RRT activation rates were used as a measure of adverse outcome for the new process and are a network team response for admitted patients who are rapidly decompensating. The association between mMEWS and the outcomes of ED length of stay in minutes and 24 hour-RRT activation was assessed using linear and logistic regression adjusting for a priori selected confounders, respectively.
Of the total 43,892 patients admitted, 19,962 (45.5%) were in the pre-mMEWS and 23,930 (54.5%) in the post-mMEWS implementation period. The median post-mMEWS ED LOS was shorter than the pre-mMEWS (376 vs 415 minutes; < 0.01). After accounting for potential confounders, there was a 4.57% decrease in the ED LOS after implementing mMEWS (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.20-4.94; < 0.01). The proportion of 24 hour-RRT did not differ significantly when comparing pre- and post-mMEWS (33.5% vs 34.4%; = 0.83).
The use of a modified MEWS enhanced admission process to the hospital medicine service, even during the COVID-19 pandemic, was associated with a significant decrease in ED LOS without a significant increase in 24 hour-RRT activation.
急诊科患者拥挤和滞留与不良后果相关,且近年来问题日益严重。我们调查了使用早期预警评分的急诊科患者流程对策的影响。
我们对宾夕法尼亚州一家一级创伤中心急诊科患者的观察数据进行了横断面分析。我们实施了改良早期预警评分(MEWS)的一个修改版本,称为mMEWS,以解决患者流程问题。纳入研究的是入住成人医院内科服务的18岁及以上患者。我们比较了mMEWS实施前(2017年2月19日至2019年2月18日)和实施后(2019年2月19日至2020年6月30日)两个时间段。在干预期间,MEWS评分低(0 - 1分)的入院患者直接进入住院楼层并下达加急医嘱,其余患者在急诊科等待,直到医院内科收治团队对患者进行评估并下达医嘱。我们调查了mMEWS、急诊科住院时间(LOS)和24小时快速反应团队(24小时 - RRT)启动之间的关联。RRT启动率被用作衡量新流程不良后果的指标,是对病情迅速恶化的入院患者的网络团队响应。分别使用线性回归和逻辑回归对预先选定的混杂因素进行调整,评估mMEWS与以分钟为单位的急诊科住院时间结果和24小时RRT启动之间的关联。
在总共43,892名入院患者中,19,962名(45.5%)处于mMEWS实施前阶段,23,930名(54.5%)处于mMEWS实施后阶段。mMEWS实施后急诊科住院时间中位数短于实施前(376分钟对415分钟;<0.01)。在考虑潜在混杂因素后,实施mMEWS后急诊科住院时间减少了4.57%(95%置信区间[CI],4.20 - 4.94;<0.01)。比较mMEWS实施前后,24小时RRT的比例没有显著差异(33.5%对34.4%;P = 0.83)。
即使在新冠疫情期间,使用改良的MEWS改善医院内科服务的入院流程,与急诊科住院时间显著缩短相关,且24小时RRT启动没有显著增加。