Purpose Racism and colonialism impact health, physician advancement, professional development and medical education in Canada. The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) has committed to addressing inequities in health in their recent statement on racism. The objective of this project was to develop recommendations for addressing racism and colonialism in emergency medicine. Methods The authors, in collaboration with a 40 member working group, conducted a literature search, held a community consultation, solicited input from expert medical, academic and community advisors, conducted a national survey of emergency physicians, and presented draft recommendations at the 2021 CAEP Academic Symposium on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion for a live facilitated discussion with a post-session survey. Results Sixteen recommendations were generated in the areas of patient care, hospital and departmental commitment to Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, physician advancement, and professional development and medical education. Conclusion Emergency physicians are uniquely positioned to promote equity at each encounter with patients, peers and learners. The 16 recommendations presented here are practical steps to countering racism and colonialism everyday in emergency medicine. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43678-021-00244-2.
Background: Homelessness is a growing Canada-wide concern. Those with no fixed address have increased rates of emergency department (ED) utilization and increased healthcare spending compared to the general population, with higher rates of acute and chronic illnesses, as well as all-cause mortality. EDs are uniquely situated to act as an access point to the network of available community services, however referral rates from the ED is uncertain. To date, there has been no data collected on London, Ontario's homeless population, their health burden, and their utilization patterns of the ED. Aim Statement: The primary objective of this study is to describe ED visits for adult patients with no fixed address in London, Ontario to assess for potential areas to improve care. Measures & Design: This is a retrospective chart review, of patients with no fixed address visiting London, Ontario Emergency Departments in 2018. ED visits were identified and pulled using either a diagnosis of “homeless”, a lack of postal code, or a postal code for a known shelter. Cases included based on postal code were manually reviewed to determine whether the patient had a resident address with the same postal code. Evaluation/Results: From this search, 4,294 visits were identified for 1237 unique patients. The median visits per person was 1 (IQR 1-2), with 388 patients having 3 or more visits, and the max being 138 visits. The median age was 38 (IQR 28-52), with 73% male. Ground ambulance was used for 46% of visits. 28% of visits were CTAS 1&2 and 5% were CTAS 5. Police facilitated visits in 401 cases. Top 3 discharge diagnosis categories were mental health (19%), infection (18%), drug misuse (17%). Discussion/Impact: Several errors were identified with our search strategy suggesting the current system of capturing homelessness in the EPR is not accurate, leading to an underestimation of the problem and limiting our ability to describe this population. The Ministry of Health mandates homelessness be applied as a tertiary discharge diagnosis during coding of the patient visit if possible. However, use of this code is inconsistent leading to large-scale omission of visits and an underrepresentation of pediatric cases. Systemic steps should be taken to improve identification of these patients moving forward.
Introduction: Depending on the time and day of initial Emergency Department (ED) presentation, some patients may require a return to the ED the following day for ultrasound examination. Return visits for ultrasound may be time and resource intensive for both patients and the ED. Qualitative experience suggests that a percentage of return ultrasounds could be performed at a non-ED facility. Our objective was to undertake a retrospective audit of return for ultrasound usage, patterns and outcomes at 2 academic EDs. Methods: A retrospective review of all adult patients returning to the ED for ultrasound at both LHSC ED sites in 2016 was undertaken. Each chart was independently reviewed by two emergency medicine consultants. Charts were assessed for day and time of initial presentation and return, type of ultrasound ordered, and length of ED stay on initial presentation and return visit. Opinion based questions were considered by reviewers, including urgency of diagnosis clarification required, if symptoms were still present on return, and if any medical or surgical treatment or follow up was arranged based on ultrasound results. Agreement between reviewers was assessed. Results: After eliminating charts for which the return visit was not for a scheduled ultrasound examination, 328 patient charts were reviewed. 63% of patients were female and median [IQR] age was 40 years [27-56]. Abdomen/pelvis represented 50% of the ultrasounds; renal 24%; venous Doppler 15.9%. Symptoms were still present and documented in 79% of cases. 22% of cases required a medical intervention and 9% an immediate surgical intervention. 11% of patients were admitted to hospital on their return visit. Outpatient follow-up based on US results was initiated in 29% of cases. Median [IQR] combined LOS was 479.5 minutes [358.5-621.75]. Agreement between reviewers for opinion based questions was poor (63%-96%). Conclusion: Ideally, formal ultrasound should be available on a 24 hour basis for ED patients in order to avoid return visits. A percentage of return for ultrasound examinations do not result in any significant change in treatment. Emergency departments should consider the development of pathways to avoid return visits for follow up ultrasound when possible. The low incidence of surgical treatment in those returning for US suggests that this population could be served in a non-hospital setting. Further research is required to support this conclusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.