Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
West J Emerg Med. 2024 Mar;25(2):226-229. doi: 10.5811/westjem.17831.
A solution for emergency department (ED) congestion remains elusive. As reliance on imaging grows, computed tomography (CT) turnaround time has been identified as a major bottleneck. In this study we sought to identify factors associated with significantly delayed CT in the ED.
We performed a retrospective analysis of all CT imaging completed at an urban, tertiary care ED from May 1-July 31, 2021. During that period, 5,685 CTs were performed on 4,344 patients, with a median time from CT order to completion of 108 minutes (Quartile 1 [Q1]: 57 minutes, Quartile 3 [Q3]: 182 minutes, interquartile range [IQR]: 125 minutes). Outliers were defined as studies that took longer than 369 minutes to complete (Q3 + 1.5 × IQR). We systematically reviewed outlier charts to determine factors associated with delay and identified five factors: behaviorally non-compliant or medically unstable patients; intravenous (IV) line issues; contrast allergies; glomerular filtration rate (GFR) concerns; and delays related to imaging protocol (eg, need for IV contrast, request for oral and/or rectal contrast). We calculated confidence intervals (CI) using the modified Wald method. Inter-rater reliability was assessed with a kappa analysis.
We identified a total of 182 outliers (4.2% of total patients). Fifteen (8.2%) cases were excluded for CT time-stamp inconsistencies. Of the 167 outliers analyzed, 38 delays (22.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17.0-29.7) were due to behaviorally non-compliant or medically unstable patients; 30 (18.0%, 95% CI 12.8-24.5) were due to IV issues; 24 (14.4%, 95% CI 9.8-20.6) were due to contrast allergies; 21 (12.6%, 95% CI 8.3-18.5) were due to GFR concerns; and 20 (12.0%, 95% CI 7.8-17.9) were related to imaging study protocols. The cause of the delay was unknown in 55 cases (32.9%, 95% CI 26.3-40.4).
Our review identified both modifiable and non-modifiable factors associated with significantly delayed CT in the ED. Patient factors such as behavior, allergies, and medical acuity cannot be controlled. However, institutional policies regarding difficult IV access, contrast administration in low GFR settings, and study protocols may be modified, capturing up to 42.6% of outliers.
急诊科(ED)拥堵问题仍然难以解决。随着对影像学的依赖增加,计算机断层扫描(CT)的周转时间已成为主要瓶颈。在这项研究中,我们试图确定与 ED 中 CT 明显延迟相关的因素。
我们对 2021 年 5 月 1 日至 7 月 31 日在城市三级护理 ED 完成的所有 CT 成像进行了回顾性分析。在此期间,对 4344 名患者进行了 5685 次 CT 检查,中位数 CT 检查完成时间为 108 分钟(第 1 四分位数 [Q1]:57 分钟,第 3 四分位数 [Q3]:182 分钟,四分位距 [IQR]:125 分钟)。超过 369 分钟的研究被定义为异常值(Q3+1.5×IQR)。我们系统地审查了异常值图表,以确定与延迟相关的因素,并确定了五个因素:行为不遵守或医学不稳定的患者;静脉(IV)线路问题;造影剂过敏;肾小球滤过率(GFR)问题;以及与成像协议相关的延迟(例如,需要 IV 造影剂,需要口服和/或直肠造影剂)。我们使用修正的 Wald 方法计算置信区间(CI)。使用 Kappa 分析评估组内一致性。
我们总共确定了 182 个异常值(占总患者的 4.2%)。15 例(8.2%)因 CT 时间戳不一致而被排除。在分析的 167 个异常值中,38 个(22.8%,95%置信区间 [CI] 17.0-29.7)是由于行为不遵守或医学不稳定的患者导致的;30 例(18.0%,95% CI 12.8-24.5)是由于 IV 问题引起的;24 例(14.4%,95% CI 9.8-20.6)是由于造影剂过敏引起的;21 例(12.6%,95% CI 8.3-18.5)是由于 GFR 问题引起的;20 例(12.0%,95% CI 7.8-17.9)与成像研究方案有关。55 例(32.9%,95% CI 26.3-40.4)的延迟原因未知。
我们的回顾确定了与 ED 中 CT 明显延迟相关的可修改和不可修改因素。患者因素,如行为、过敏和医疗急症,无法控制。然而,关于困难的 IV 通路、低 GFR 环境下造影剂的管理以及研究方案的机构政策可能会被修改,这可能会捕获高达 42.6%的异常值。