Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Although systemic thrombolysis (ST) is the standard of care in the treatment of high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE), large variations in real-world usage exist, including its use to treat intermediate-risk PE. A paucity of data is available to define the outcomes and practice patterns of the ST dose, duration, and treatment of presumed and imaging-confirmed PE. METHODS:We performed a multicenter retrospective study to evaluate the real-world practice patterns of ST use in the setting of acute PE (presumed vs imaging-confirmed intermediate- and high-risk PE). Patients who had received tissue plasminogen activator for PE between 2017 and 2019 were included. We compared the baseline clinical characteristics, tissue plasminogen activator practice patterns, and outcomes for patients with confirmed vs presumed PE. RESULTS:A total of 104 patients had received ST for PE: 52 with confirmed PE and 52 with presumed PE. Significantly more patients who had been treated for presumed PE had experienced cardiac arrest (n = 47; 90%) compared with those with confirmed PE (n = 23; 44%; P < .01). Survival to hospital discharge was 65% for the patients with confirmed PE vs 6% for those with presumed PE (P < .01). The use of ST was contraindicated for 56% of the patients with confirmed PE, with major bleeding in 26% but no intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS:The in-hospital mortality of patients with confirmed acute PE has remained high (35%) in contemporary practice for those treated with ST. A large proportion of these patients had had contraindications to ST, and the rates of major bleeding were significant. Those with confirmed PE had had a higher survival rate compared with those with presumed PE, including those with cardiac arrest. This observation suggests a limited role for empiric thrombolysis in cardiac arrest situations.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Sepsis is a common cause of emergency department (ED) presentation and hospital admission, accounting for a disproportionate number of deaths each year relative to its incidence. Sepsis outcomes have improved with increased recognition and treatment standards promoted by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. Due to delay in recognition and other barriers, sepsis bundle compliance remains low nationally. We hypothesised that a targeted education intervention regarding use of an electronic health record (EHR) tool for identification and management of sepsis would lead to increased EHR tool utilisation and increased sepsis bundle compliance. METHODS:We created a multidisciplinary quality improvement team to provide training and feedback on EHR tool utilisation within our ED. A prospective evaluation of the rate of EHR tool utilisation was monitored from June through December 2020. Simultaneously, we conducted two retrospective cohort studies comparing overall sepsis bundle compliance for patients when EHR tool was used versus not used. The first cohort was all patients with intention-to-treat for any sepsis severity. The second cohort of patients included adult patients with time of recognition of sepsis in the ED admitted with a diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock. RESULTS:EHR tool utilisation increased from 23.3% baseline prior to intervention to 87.2% during the study. In the intention-to-treat cohort, there was a statistically significant difference in compliance between EHR tool utilisation versus no utilisation in overall bundle compliance (p<0.001) and for several individual components: initial lactate (p=0.009), repeat lactate (p=0.001), timely antibiotics (p=0.031), blood cultures before antibiotics (p=0.001), initial fluid bolus (p<0.001) and fluid reassessment (p<0.001). In the severe sepsis and septic shock cohort, EHR tool use increased from 71.2% pre-intervention to 85.0% post-intervention (p=0.008). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:With training, feedback and EHR optimisation, an EHR tool can be successfully integrated into current workflows and appears to increase sepsis bundle compliance.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased rates of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERT) have previously been associated with improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PERT utilization, recommendations, and outcomes for patients diagnosed with acute PE changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients with acute PE who received care at an academic hospital system in New York City between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. These patients were compared against historic controls between March 1st and April 30th, 2019. PE severity, PERT utilization, initial management, PERT recommendations, and outcomes were compared. There were more cases of PE during the pandemic (82 vs. 59), but less PERT activations (26.8% vs. 64.4%, p < 0.001) despite similar markers of PE severity. PERT recommendations were similar before and during the pandemic; anticoagulation was most recommended (89.5% vs. 86.4%, p = 0.70). During the pandemic, those with PERT activations were more likely to be female (63.6% vs. 31.7%, p = 0.01), have a history of DVT/PE (22.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.01), and to be SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative (68.2% vs. 38.3% p = 0.02). PERT activation during the pandemic is associated with decreased length of stay (7.7 ± 7.7 vs. 13.2 ± 12.7 days, p = 0.02). PERT utilization decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and its activation was associated with different biases. PERT recommendations and outcomes were similar before and during the pandemic, and led to decreased length of stay during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND:The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic quickly challenged New York City health care systems. Telemedicine has been suggested to manage acute complaints and divert patients from in-person care. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to describe and assess the impact of a rapidly scaled virtual urgent care platform during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who presented to a virtual urgent care platform over 1 month during the COVID-19 pandemic surge. We described scaling our telemedicine urgent care capacity, described patient clinical characteristics, assessed for emergency department (ED) referrals, and analyzed postvisit surveys. RESULTS:During the study period, a total of 17,730 patients were seen via virtual urgent care; 454 (2.56%) were referred to an ED. The most frequent diagnoses were COVID-19 related or upper respiratory symptoms. Geospatial analysis indicated a wide catchment area. There were 251 providers onboarded to the platform; at peak, 62 providers supplied 364 h of coverage in 1 day. The average patient satisfaction score was 4.4/5. There were 2668 patients (15.05%) who responded to the postvisit survey; 1236 (49.35%) would have sought care in an ED (11.86%) or in-person urgent care (37.49%). CONCLUSIONS:A virtual urgent care platform was scaled to manage a volume of more than 800 patients a day across a large catchment area during the pandemic surge. About half of the patients would otherwise have presented to an ED or urgent care in person. Virtual urgent care is an option for appropriate patients while minimizing in-person visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND:Pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) have become increasingly popular at institutions around the country, although the evidence to support their efficacy is limited. PERTs are mechanisms for rapid involvement of a multidisciplinary team in the management of a time-sensitive condition with many treatment options. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 201 patients with PERT activations since inception, collecting data on demographics, time to treatment, treatment modality, and in-hospital outcomes. RESULTS:Massive pulmonary embolism accounted for 16 (8.7%) PERT activations. The majority of patients were treated without invasive intervention; 91.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.1%-95.7%) of patients received anticoagulation alone, 4.5% (95% CI, 0%-18.6%) had catheter-directed therapy (CDT), and 3.0% (95% CI, 0%-16.9%) had systemic administration of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). The average time to intervention was 665 minutes (95% CI, 249-1080 minutes) for CDT and 22 minutes (95% CI, 0-456 minutes) for systemic TPA. The average time to anticoagulation was 2.3 minutes (95% CI, 0-43 minutes). There was a trend toward higher rates of cardiac events (odds ratio [OR], 12.68; 95% CI, 0.62-65.74) and death (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 0.28-5.18) among patients with massive PE. There was a higher rate of cardiac events (OR, 5.66; 95% CI, 1.34-23.83) among patients who received tPA or an invasive intervention. There was no difference in mortality rates of patients who underwent aggressive management compared with anticoagulation alone. CONCLUSIONS:A dedicated PERT results in efficient delivery of care and excellent outcomes, in part owing to the rapid (on average, 8 minutes) time to initiation of a multidisciplinary discussion. Patients who ultimately underwent CDT had an interval of >10 hours on average between diagnosis and CDT. This provisional or delayed approach to CDT in selected patients who were not improving with anticoagulation alone (and therefore had potential for higher net benefit from a procedure with its own inherent risks) may have resulted in a lower rate of CDT.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) velocity time integral (VTI), an echocardiographic measure of stroke distance, correlates with cardiac index. We sought to determine the prognostic significance of low RVOT VTI on clinical outcomes among patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We conducted a retrospective review of echocardiograms on Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) activations at our institution. The main outcome was a composite of death, cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic deterioration. RESULTS:Of 188 patients, 30 met the combined outcome (16%) and had significantly lower RVOT VTI measurements (9.0 cm v 13.4 cm, p < 0.0001). The AUC for RVOT VTI at a cutoff of 10 cm was 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.90) with a sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of 0.72, 0.81, 0.94, and 0.42, respectively. Fifty-two patients of the cohort were classified as intermediate-high-risk PE and 21% of those met the combined outcome. RVOT VTI was lower among outcome positive patients (7.3 cm v 10.7 cm, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:Low RVOT VTI is associated with poor clinical outcomes among patients with acute PE.

BACKGROUND:The emergency department is a critical juncture in the trajectory of care of patients with serious, life-limiting illness. Implementation of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool automates identification of older adults who may benefit from palliative care instead of relying upon providers to identify such patients, thus improving quality of care by assisting providers with adhering to guidelines. The Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine (PRIM-ER) study aims to optimize the use of the electronic health record by creating a CDS tool to identify high risk patients most likely to benefit from primary palliative care and provide point-of-care clinical recommendations. METHODS:A clinical decision support tool entitled Emergency Department Supportive Care Clinical Decision Support (Support-ED) was developed as part of an institutionally-sponsored value based medicine initiative at the Ronald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine at NYU Langone Health. A multidisciplinary approach was used to develop Support-ED including: a scoping review of ED palliative care screening tools; launch of a workgroup to identify patient screening criteria and appropriate referral services; initial design and usability testing via the standard System Usability Scale questionnaire, education of the ED workforce on the Support-ED background, purpose and use, and; creation of a dashboard for monitoring and feedback. RESULTS:The scoping review identified the Palliative Care and Rapid Emergency Screening (P-CaRES) survey as a validated instrument in which to adapt and apply for the creation of the CDS tool. The multidisciplinary workshops identified two primary objectives of the CDS: to identify patients with indicators of serious life limiting illness, and to assist with referrals to services such as palliative care or social work. Additionally, the iterative design process yielded three specific patient scenarios that trigger a clinical alert to fire, including: 1) when an advance care planning document was present, 2) when a patient had a previous disposition to hospice, and 3) when historical and/or current clinical data points identify a serious life-limiting illness without an advance care planning document present. Monitoring and feedback indicated a need for several modifications to improve CDS functionality. CONCLUSIONS:CDS can be an effective tool in the implementation of primary palliative care quality improvement best practices. Health systems should thoughtfully consider tailoring their CDSs in order to adapt to their unique workflows and environments. The findings of this research can assist health systems in effectively integrating a primary palliative care CDS system seamlessly into their processes of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109. Registered 6 February 2018, Grant Number: AT009844-01.

The left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) velocity time integral (VTI) is an easily measured echocardiographic stroke volume index analog. Low values predict adverse outcomes in left ventricular failure. We postulate the left ventricular VTI may be a signal of right ventricular dysfunction in acute pulmonary embolism, and therefore a predictor of poor outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed echocardiograms on all Pulmonary Embolism Response Team activations at our institution at the time of pulmonary embolism diagnosis. Low LVOT VTI was defined as ⩽ 15 cm. We examined two composite outcomes: (1) in-hospital death or cardiac arrest; and (2) shock or need for primary reperfusion therapies. Sixty-one of 188 patients (32%) had a LVOT VTI of ⩽ 15 cm. Low VTI was associated with in-hospital death or cardiac arrest (odds ratio (OR) 6, 95% CI 2, 17.9; p = 0.0014) and shock or need for reperfusion (OR 23.3, 95% CI 6.6, 82.1; p < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, LVOT VTI ⩽ 15 remained significant for death or cardiac arrest (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.02, 11.9; p = 0.047) and for shock or need for reperfusion (OR 8.12, 95% CI 1.62, 40.66; p = 0.011). Among intermediate-high-risk patients, low VTI was the only variable associated with the composite outcome of death, cardiac arrest, shock, or need for reperfusion (OR 14, 95% CI 1.7, 118.4; p = 0.015). LVOT VTI is associated with adverse short-term outcomes in acute pulmonary embolism. The VTI may help risk stratify patients with intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism.