Faculty Bibliography

STUDY OBJECTIVE:We sought to describe diagnosis rates and compare common process outcomes between geriatric emergency departments (EDs) and nongeriatric EDs participating in the American College of Emergency Physicians Clinical Emergency Data Registry (CEDR). METHODS:We conducted an observational study of ED visits in calendar year 2021 within the CEDR by older adults. The analytic sample included 6,444,110 visits at 38 geriatric EDs and 152 matched nongeriatric EDs, with the geriatric ED status determined based on linkage to the American College of Emergency Physicians' Geriatric ED Accreditation program. Stratified by age, we assessed diagnosis rates (X/1000) for 4 common geriatric syndrome conditions and a set of common process outcomes including the ED length of stay, discharge rates, and 72-hour revisit rates. RESULTS:Across all age categories, geriatric EDs had higher diagnosis rates than nongeriatric EDs for 3 of the 4 following geriatric syndrome conditions of interest: urinary tract infection, dementia, and delirium/altered mental status. The median ED site-level length of stay for older adults was lower at geriatric EDs compared with that at nongeriatric EDs, whereas 72-hour revisit rates were similar across all age categories. Geriatric EDs exhibited a median discharge rate of 67.5% for adults aged 65 to 74 years, 60.8% for adults aged 75 to 84 years, and 55.6% for adults aged >85 years. Comparatively, the median discharge rate at nongeriatric ED sites was 69.0% for adults aged 65 to 74 years, 64.2% for adults aged 75 to 84 years, and 61.3% for adults aged >85 years. CONCLUSION:Geriatric EDs had higher geriatric syndrome diagnosis rates, lower ED lengths of stay, and similar discharge and 72-hour revisit rates when compared with nongeriatric EDs in the CEDR. These findings provide the first benchmarks for emergency care process outcomes in geriatric EDs compared with nongeriatric EDs.

To better understand and prioritize research on emergency care for Veterans, the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development convened the 16th State of the Art Conference on VA Emergency Medicine (SAVE) in Winter 2022 with emergency clinicians, researchers, operational leaders, and additional stakeholders in attendance. Three specific areas of focus were identified including older Veterans, Veterans with mental health needs, and emergency care in the community (non-VA) settings. Among older Veterans, identified priorities included examination of variation in care and its impact on patient outcomes, utilization, and costs; quality of emergency department (ED) care transitions and strategies to improve them; impact of geriatric ED care improvement initiatives; and use of geriatric assessment tools in the ED. For Veterans with mental health needs, priorities included enhancing the reach of effective, multicomponent suicide prevention interventions; development and evaluation of interventions to manage substance use disorders; and identifying and examining safety and effective acute psychosis practices. Community (non-VA) emergency care priorities included examining changes in patterns of use and costs in VA and the community care settings as a result of recent policy and coverage changes (with an emphasis on modifiable factors); understanding quality, safety, and Veteran experience differences between VA and community settings; and better understanding follow-up needs among Veterans who received emergency care (or urgent care) and how well those needs are being coordinated, communicated, and met. Beyond these three groups, cross-cutting themes included the use of telehealth and implementation science to refine multicomponent interventions, care coordination, and data needs from both VA and non-VA sources. Findings from this conference will be disseminated through multiple mechanisms and contribute to future funding applications focused on improving Veteran health.

OBJECTIVES:In 2018, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Office of Geriatrics and Extended Care (GEC) and the National Emergency Medicine (EM) Program partnered to improve emergency care for older Veterans. A core team disseminated age-friendly models of care via education and standardization of practice with the goal of multisite geriatric emergency department (GED) accreditation. We compare rates of GED screening at VAs with GED implementation to those without. METHODS:Observational evaluation of GED screening of older Veterans (≥65 years) at VA Emergency Departments (ED) from January 2018 to March 2022, during peak pandemic years. Data were extracted from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse of Veteran ED visit encounters to track documented GED screens and Veteran demographic data. Generalized estimating equation models were used to compare screening completion across different levels of GED accreditation, adjusting for potential confounding. RESULTS:During this period, over 1.07 million Veterans ≥ 65 years of age made 4.07 million VA ED visits. Mean (±SD) age was 73.4 (±7.2) years, 96.5% were male, 68% were White, and 89.9% made their index ED visit at a non-GED VA ED. As of early 2022, a total of 50 of 111 VA EDs have achieved or applied for GED accreditation. During early 2022, 8.3% of all visits by older Veterans had at least one GED screen documented; 15% were screened at Levels 1-3 GED versus 2.2% at non-GED facilities. Screens identifying older adults at risk for poor outcomes, for delirium, and for falls had the highest usage rates within VA GEDs. Veterans seen at Level 1 GEDs had a 76-fold greater odds of having a GED screen than at Level 3 GEDs (odds ratio 75.8, 95% confidence interval 72.8-79.0). CONCLUSIONS:Through VA National Office of GEC and EM Program partnership, the VA has created, standardized, and disseminated a GED Model of Care, despite the pandemic. GED accreditation was associated with GED screen implementation, with Level 1 having the highest screening prevalence.

The objective of the study is to identify healthcare events leading to a diagnosis of dementia from a large real-world dataset. This study uses a data-driven approach to identify temporally ordered pairs and trajectories of healthcare codes in the electronic health record (EHR). This allows for discovery of novel temporal risk factors leading to an outcome of interest that may otherwise be unobvious. We identified several known (Down syndrome RR = 116.1, thiamine deficiency RR = 76.1, and Parkinson's disease RR = 41.1) and unknown (Brief psychotic disorder RR = 68.6, Toxic effect of metals RR = 40.4, and Schizoaffective disorders RR = 40.0) factors for a specific dementia diagnosis. The associations with the greatest risk for any dementia diagnosis were found to be primarily related to mental health (Brief psychotic disorder RR = 266.5, Dissociative and conversion disorders RR = 169.8), or neurologic conditions or procedures (Dystonia RR = 121.9, Lumbar Puncture RR = 119.0). Trajectory and clustering analysis identified factors related to cerebrovascular disorders, as well as diagnoses which increase the risk of toxic imbalances. The results of this study have the ability to provide valuable insights into potential patient progression towards dementia and improve recognition of patients at risk for developing dementia.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The "4Ms" model - What Matters, Medication, Mentation, and Mobility - is increasingly gaining attention in age-friendly health systems, yet a feasible approach to identifying what matters to older adults in the emergency department (ED) is lacking. Adapting the "What Matters" questions to the ED setting, we sought to describe the concerns and desired outcomes of both older adult patients seeking ED care and their treating clinicians. METHODS:We conducted 46 dyadic semi-structured interviews of cognitively intact older adults and their treating clinicians. We used the "What Matters" conversation guide to explore patients' 1) concerns and 2) desired outcomes. We then asked analogous questions to each patient's treating clinician regarding the patient's priorities. Interviews were professionally transcribed and coded using an inductive approach of thematic analysis to identify emergent themes. RESULTS:Interviews with older adults lasted a mean of three minutes, with a range of 1-8 minutes. Regarding patients' concerns, five themes emerged from older adults: 1) concern through a family member or outpatient clinician recommendation; 2) no concern, with a high degree of trust in the healthcare system; 3) concerns regarding symptom cause identification; 4) concerns regarding symptom resolution; and 5) concerns regarding preservation of their current status. Regarding desired outcomes, five priority themes emerged among older adults: 1) obtaining a diagnosis; 2) returning to their home environment; 3) reducing or resolving symptoms; 4) maintaining self-care and independence; and 5) gaining reassurance. Responding to what they believed mattered most to older adult patients, ED clinicians believed that older adults were concerned primarily about symptom cause identification and resolution and primarily desired a return to the home environment and symptom reduction. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This work identifies concerns and desired outcomes of both older adult patients seeking ED care and their treating clinicians as well as the feasibility of incorporating the "What Matters" questions within ED clinical practice.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Enhancing Quality of Prescribing Practices for Older Adults Discharged from the Emergency Department (EQUIPPED) is an effective quality improvement program initially designed in the Veterans Administration (VA) health care system to reduce potentially inappropriate medication prescribing for adults aged 65 years and older. This study examined factors that influence implementation of EQUIPPED in EDs from four distinct, non-VA academic health systems using a convergent mixed methods design that operationalized the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Fidelity of delivery served as the primary implementation outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:= 22) and data from CFIR-based surveys of ED providers (108/234, response rate of 46.2%) to identify CFIR constructs that distinguished EDs with higher vs. lower levels of implementation. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Overall, three sites demonstrated higher levels of implementation (scoring 8-9 of 12) and one ED exhibited a lower level (scoring 5 of 12). Two constructs distinguished between levels of implementation as measured through both quantitative and qualitative approaches: patient needs and resources, and organizational culture. Implementation climate distinguished level of implementation in the qualitative analysis only. Networks and communication, and leadership engagement distinguished level of implementation in the quantitative analysis only. DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:Using CFIR, we demonstrate how a range of factors influence a critical implementation outcome and build an evidence-based approach on how to prime an organizational setting, such as an academic health system ED, for successful implementation. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:This study provides insights into implementation of evidence-informed programs targeting medication safety in ED settings and serves as a potential model for how to integrate theory-based qualitative and quantitative methods in implementation studies.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Older adults constitute a large and growing proportion of the population and have unique care needs in the emergency department (ED) setting. The geriatric ED accreditation program aims to improve emergency care provided to older adults by standardizing care provided across accredited geriatric EDs (GED) and through implementation of geriatric-specific care processes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate select care processes at accredited level 1 and level 2 GEDs. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:selected five GED care processes for analysis: initiatives related to delirium, screening for dementia, assessment of function and functional decline, geriatric falls, and minimizing medication-related adverse events. For all protocols, a trained research assistant abstracted information on the tool used or care process, which patients received the interventions, and staff members were involved in the care process; additional information was abstracted specific to individual care processes. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 35 level 1 and 2 GEDs were included in this analysis. Among care processes studied, geriatric falls were the most common (31 GEDs, 89%) followed by geriatric pain management (25 GEDs, 71%), minimizing the use of potentially inappropriate medications (24 EDs, 69%), delirium (22 GEDs, 63%), medication reconciliation (21 GEDs, 60%), functional assessment (20 GEDs, 57%), and dementia screening (17 GEDs, 49%). For protocols related to delirium, dementia, function, and geriatric falls, sites used an array of different screening tools and there was heterogeneity in who performed the screening and which patients were assessed. Medication reconciliation protocols leveraged pharmacists, pharmacy technicians and/or nurses. Protocols on avoiding potentially inappropriate medication administration generally focused on ED administration of medications and used the BEERs criteria, and few sites indicated whether pain medications protocols had dosing modifications for age and/or renal function. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:This study provides a snapshot of care processes implemented in level 1 and level 2 accredited GEDs and demonstrates significant heterogeny in how these care processes are implemented.

OBJECTIVES:To summarize research on optimal emergency department (ED) care practices for persons living with dementia (PLWDs) and develop research priorities. DESIGN:Systematic scoping review. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS:PLWDs in the ED. METHODS:The following Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) questions were developed: PICO 1, What components of emergency department care improve patient-centered outcomes for persons with dementia? PICO 2, How do emergency care needs for persons with dementia differ from other patients in the emergency department? A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines and presented to the Geriatric Emergency care Applied Research 2.0 Advancing Dementia Care network to inform research priorities. RESULTS:From the 6348 publications identified, 23 were abstracted for PICO 1 and 26 were abstracted for PICO 2. Emergency care considerations for PLWDs included functional dependence, behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, and identification of and management of pain. Concerns regarding ED care processes, the ED environment, and meeting a PWLD's basic needs were described. A comprehensive geriatric assessment and dedicated ED unit, a home hospital program, and a low-stimulation bed shade and contact-free monitor all showed improvement in patient-centered or health care use outcomes. However, all were single-site studies evaluating different outcomes. These results informed the following research priorities: (1) training and dementia care competencies; (2) patient-centric and care partner-centric evaluation interventions; (3) the impact of community- and identity-based factors on ED care for PLWDs; (4) economic or other implementation science measures to address viability; and (5) environmental, operational, personnel, system, or policy changes to improve ED care for PLWDs. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:A wide range of components of both ED care practices and ED care needs for PLWDs have been studied. Although many interventions show positive results, the lack of depth and reproducible results prevent specific recommendations on best practices in ED care for PLWDs.