Research and policy recommendations from the SOTA XVI: State of the Art Conference on VA Emergency Medicine

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.     

Future Directions in Sex‐ and Gender‐specific Emergency Medicine

The 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference “Gender‐Specific Research in Emergency Medicine: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes” convened a diverse group of stakeholders to target gaps in emergency medicine (EM) sex‐ and gender‐specific research and identify research priorities. At the close of the conference, the executive committee sought feedback from group leaders and conference attendees about the next critical steps in EM sex‐ and gender‐specific research, goals for their own future research, and anticipated barriers in pursuing this research. This article summarizes this feedback on the future directions in sex‐ and gender‐specific research in emergency care and strategies to overcome barriers.     

2022 consensus conference on diversity,equity, and inclusion: Developing an emergency medicine research agenda for addressing racism through health care research

Racism in emergency medicine (EM) health care research is pervasive but often underrecognized. To understand the current state of research on racism in EM health care research, we developed a consensus working group on this topic, which concluded a year of work with a consensus-building session as part of the overall Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) consensus conference on diversity, equity, and inclusion: “Developing a Research Agenda for Addressing Racism in Emergency Medicine,” held on May 10, 2022. In this article, we report the development, details of preconference methods and preliminary results, and the final consensus of the Healthcare Research Working Group. Preconference work based on literature review and expert opinion identified 13 potential priority research questions that were refined through an iterative process to a list of 10. During the conference, the subgroup used consensus methodology and a “consensus dollar” (contingent valuation) approach to prioritize research questions. The subgroup identified three research gaps: remedies for racial bias and systematic racism, biases and heuristics in clinical care, and racism in study design, and we derived a list of six high-priority research questions for our specialty.     

Public Health in the Emergency Department: Surveillance, Screening, and Intervention—Funding and Sustainability

This article summarizes the work and discussions of the funding and sustainability work group at the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference “Public Health in the ED: Surveillance, Screening, and Intervention.” The funding and sustainability session participants were asked to address the following overarching question: “What are the opportunities and what is needed to encourage academic emergency medicine (EM) to take advantage of the opportunities for funding available for public health research initiatives and build stronger academic programs focusing on public health within EM?” Prior to the session, members of the group reviewed research funding for EM in public health, as well as the priorities of federal agencies and foundations. Recommendations for actions by EM summarize the findings of workshop.     

Practical implications of implementing emergency department crowding interventions: summary of a moderated panel

Emergency department (ED) crowding continues to be a major public health problem in the United States and around the world. In June 2011, the Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference focused on exploring interventions to alleviate ED crowding and to generate a series of research agendas on the topic. As part of the conference, a panel of leaders in the emergency care community shared their perspectives on emergency care, crowding, and some of the fundamental issues facing emergency care today. The panel participants included Drs. Bruce Siegel, Sandra Schneider, Peter Viccellio, and Randy Pilgrim. The panel was moderated by Dr. Jesse Pines. Dr. Siegel's comments focused on his work on Urgent Matters, which conducted two multihospital collaboratives related to improving ED crowding and disseminating results. Dr. Schneider focused on the future of ED crowding measures, the importance of improving our understanding of ED boarding and its implications, and the need for the specialty of emergency medicine (EM) to move beyond the discussion of unnecessary visits. Dr. Viccellio's comments focused on several areas, including the need for a clear message about unnecessary ED visits by the emergency care community and potential solutions to improve ED crowding. Finally, Dr. Pilgrim focused on the effect of effective leadership and management in crowding interventions and provided several examples of how these considerations directly affected the success or failure of well-constructed ED crowding interventions. This article describes each panelist's comments in detail.     

Is lower 30-day mortality posthospital admission among blacks unique to the Veterans Affairs health care system?

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported lower risk-adjusted mortality for blacks than whites within the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, particularly for those age 65 and older. This finding may be a result of the VA's integrated health care system, which reduces barriers to care through subsidized comprehensive health care services. However, no studies have directly compared racial differences in mortality within 30 days of hospitalization between the VA and non-VA facilities in the US health care system. OBJECTIVE: To compare risk-adjusted 30-day mortality for black and white males after hospital admission to VA and non-VA hospitals, with separate comparisons for patients younger than age 65 and those age 65 and older. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective observational study using hospital claims data from the national VA system and all non-VA hospitals in Pennsylvania and California. SUBJECTS: A total of 369,155 VA and 1,509,891 non-VA hospitalizations for a principal diagnosis of pneumonia, congestive heart failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, hip fracture, stroke, or acute myocardial infarction between 1996 and 2001. MEASURES: Mortality within 30 days of hospital admission. RESULTS: Among those under age 65, blacks in VA and non-VA hospitals had similar odds ratios of 30-day mortality relative to whites for gastrointestinal bleeding, hip fracture, stroke, and acute myocardial infarction. Among those age 65 and older, blacks in both VA and non-VA hospitals had significantly reduced odds of 30-day mortality compared with whites for all conditions except pneumonia in the VA. The differences in mortality by race are remarkably similar in VA and non-VA settings. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that factors associated with better short-term outcomes for blacks are not unique to the VA.     

Regionalized Care for Time‐critical Conditions: Lessons Learned From Existing Networks

The 2010 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference “Beyond Regionalization” aimed to place the design of a 21st century emergency care delivery system at the center of emergency medicine’s (EM’s) health policy research agenda. To examine the lessons learned from existing regional systems, consensus conference organizers convened a panel discussion made up of experts from the fields of acute care surgery, interventional cardiology, acute ischemic stroke, cardiac arrest, critical care medicine, pediatric EM, and medical toxicology. The organizers asked that each member provide insight into the barriers that slowed network creation and the solutions that allowed them to overcome barriers. For ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management, the American Heart Association’s (AHA’s) Mission: Lifeline aims to increase compliance with existing guidelines through improvements in the chain of survival, including emergency medical services (EMS) protocols. Increasing use of therapeutic hypothermia post–cardiac arrest through a network of hospitals in Virginia has led to dramatic improvements in outcome. A regionalized network of acute stroke management in Cincinnati was discussed, in addition to the effect of pediatric referral centers on pediatric capabilities of surrounding facilities. The growing importance of telemedicine to a variety of emergencies, including trauma and critical care, was presented. Finally, the importance of establishing a robust reimbursement mechanism was illustrated by the threatened closure of poison control centers nationwide. The panel discussion added valuable insight into the possibilities of maximizing patient outcomes through regionalized systems of emergency care. A primary challenge remaining is for EM to help to integrate the existing and developing disease‐based systems of care into a more comprehensive emergency care system. Academic Emergency Medicine 2010; 17:1354–1358 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine     

Consensus-based recommendations for research priorities related to interventions to safeguard patient safety in the crowded emergency department

This article describes the results of the Interventions to Safeguard Safety breakout session of the 2011 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference entitled "Interventions to Assure Quality in the Crowded Emergency Department." Using a multistep nominal group technique, experts in emergency department (ED) crowding, patient safety, and systems engineering defined knowledge gaps and priority research questions related to the maintenance of safety in the crowded ED. Consensus was reached for seven research priorities related to interventions to maintain safety in the setting of a crowded ED. Included among these are: 1) How do routine corrective processes and compensating mechanism change during crowding? 2) What metrics should be used to determine ED safety? 3) How can checklists ensure safer care and what factors contribute to their success or failure? 4) What constitutes safe staffing levels/ratios? 5) How can we align emergency medicine (EM)-specific patient safety issues with national patient safety issues? 6) How can we develop metrics and skills to recognize when an ED is getting close to catastrophic overload conditions? and 7) What can EM learn from experts and modeling from fields outside of medicine to develop innovative solutions? These priorities have the potential to inform future clinical and human factors research and extramural funding decisions related to this important topic.     

Unique Characteristics of Emergency Care Research: Scope, Populations, and Infrastructure

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program and the 2006 Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report on the future of emergency care highlight the need for coordinated emergency care research (ECR) to improve the outcomes of acutely ill or injured patients. In response, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) sponsored the Emergency Care Research Network (ECRN) Conference in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2008. The conference objectives were to identify the unique nature of ECR and the infrastructure needed to support ECR networks and to understand the optimal role of emergency medicine (EM) and other acute care specialties in research networks. Prior to the conference, participants responded to questions addressing the relevant issues that would form the basis of breakout session discussions; two of these breakout questions are summarized in this report: 1) what makes EM research unique? and 2) what are the critical components needed to establish and maintain networked ECR? Emergency care research was defined as “the systematic examination of patient care that is expected to be continuously available to diverse populations presenting with undifferentiated symptoms of acute illness, or acutely decompensated chronic illness, and whose outcomes depend on timely diagnosis and treatment.” The chain of ECR may extend beyond the physical emergency department (ED) in both place and time and integrate prehospital care, as well as short‐ and long‐term outcome determination. ECR may extend beyond individual patients and have as the focus of investigation the actual system of emergency care delivery itself and its effects on the community with respect to access to care, use of resources, and cost. Infrastructure determinants of research network success identified by conference participants included multidisciplinary collaboration, accurate long‐term outcome determination, novel information technology, intellectual infrastructure, and wider network relationships that extend beyond the ED.     

Homeland security and public health: role of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the US Department of Homeland Security, and implications for the public health community

The terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 led to the largest US Government transformation since the formation of the Department of Defense following World War II. More than 22 different agencies, in whole or in part, and >170,000 employees were reorganized to form a new Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with the primary mission to protect the American homeland. Legislation enacted in November 2002 transferred the entire Federal Emergency Management Agency and several Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) assets to DHS, including the Office of Emergency Response, and oversight for the National Disaster Medical System, Strategic National Stockpile, and Metropolitan Medical Response System. This created a potential separation of "health" and "medical" assets between the DHS and HHS. A subsequent presidential directive mandated the development of a National Incident Management System and an all-hazard National Response Plan. While no Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) assets were targeted for transfer, the VA remains the largest integrated healthcare system in the nation with important support roles in homeland security that complement its primary mission to provide care to veterans. The Emergency Management Strategic Healthcare Group (EMSHG) within the VA's medical component, the Veteran Health Administration (VHA), is the executive agent for the VA's Fourth Mission, emergency management. In addition to providing comprehensive emergency management services to the VA, the EMSHG coordinates medical back-up to the Department of Defense, and assists the public via the National Disaster Medical System and the National Response Plan. This article describes the VA's role in homeland security and disasters, and provides an overview of the ongoing organizational and operational changes introduced by the formation of the new DHS. Challenges and opportunities for public health are highlighted.     

Conceptual Models of Health Behavior: Research in the Emergency Care Settings

This article provides recommendations for incorporating conceptual models of health behavior change into research conducted in emergency care settings. The authors drafted a set of preliminary recommendations, which were reviewed and discussed by a panel of experienced investigators attending the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference. The original recommendations were expanded and refined based on their input. This article reports the final recommendations. Three recommendations were made: 1) research conducted in emergency care settings that focuses on health behaviors should be grounded in formal conceptual models, 2) investigators should clearly operationalize their outcomes of interest, and 3) expected relations between theoretical constructs and outcomes should be made explicit prior to initiating a study. A priori hypothesis generation grounded in conceptual models of health behavior, followed by empirical validation of these hypotheses, is needed to improve preventive and public health–related interventions in emergency care settings.     

Emergency Medicine Public Health Research Funded by Federal Agencies: Progress and Priorities

The emergency department (ED) visit provides an opportunity to impact the health of the public throughout the entire spectrum of care, from prevention to treatment. As the federal government has a vested interest in funding research and providing programmatic opportunities that promote the health of the public, emergency medicine (EM) is prime to develop a research agenda to advance the field. EM researchers need to be aware of federal funding opportunities, which entails an understanding of the organizational structure of the federal agencies that fund medical research, and the rules and regulations governing applications for grants. Additionally, there are numerous funding streams outside of the National Institutes of Health (NIH; the primary federal health research agency). EM researchers should seek funding from agencies according to each agency's mission and aims. Finally, while funds from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are an important source of support for EM research, we need to look beyond traditional sources and appeal to other agencies with a vested interest in promoting public health in EDs. EM requires a broad skill set from a multitude of medical disciplines, and conducting research in the field will require looking for funding opportunities in a variety of traditional and not so traditional places within and without the federal government. The following is the discussion of a moderated session at the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference that included panel discussants from the National Institutes of Mental Health, Drug Abuse, and Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Further information is also provided to discuss those agencies and centers not represented.     

Emergency Care Research Funding in the Global Health Context: Trends,Priorities, and Future Directions

Over the past few decades there has been a steady growth in funding for global health, yet generally little is known about funding for global health research. As part of the 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, a session was convened to discuss emergency care research funding in the global health context. Overall, the authors found a lack of evidence available to determine funding priorities or quantify current funding for acute care research in global health. This article summarizes the initial preparatory research and reports on the results of the consensus conference focused on identifying challenges and strategies to improve funding for global emergency care research. The consensus conference meeting led to the creation of near‐ and long‐term goals to strengthen global emergency care research funding and the development of important research questions. The research questions represent a consensus view of important outstanding questions that will assist emergency care researchers to better understand the current funding landscape and bring evidence to the debate on funding priorities of global health and emergency care. The four key areas of focus for researchers are: 1) quantifying funding for global health and emergency care research, 2) understanding current research funding priorities, 3) identifying barriers to emergency care research funding, and 4) using existing data to quantify the need for emergency services and acute care research. This research agenda will enable emergency health care scientists to use evidence when advocating for more funding for emergency care research.     

Patient‐centered Integrated Networks of Emergency Care: Consensus‐based Recommendations and Future Research Priorities

Patient‐centered care is defined by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) as care that is responsive to individual patient needs and values and that guides the treatment decisions. This article is a result of a breakout session of the 2010 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) consensus conference and describes the process of developing consensus‐based recommendations for providing patient‐centered emergency care. The objectives of the working group were to identify and describe the critical gaps in the provision of patient‐centered care, develop a consensus‐based research agenda, and create a list of future research priorities. Using e‐mail and in‐person meetings, knowledge gaps were identified in the areas of respect for patient preferences, coordination of clinical care, and communication among health care providers. Four consensus‐based recommendations were developed on the following themes: enhancing communication and patient advocacy in emergency departments (EDs), facilitating care coordination after discharge, defining metrics for patient‐centered care, and placing the locus of control of medical information into patients’ hands. The set of research priorities based on these recommendations was created to promote research and advance knowledge in this dimension of clinical care. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:1322–1329 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine     

Research Using Emergency Department–related Data Sets: Current Status and Future Directions

The 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference focused on "Public Health in the ED: Surveillance, Screening and Intervention." One conference breakout session discussed the significant research value of health-related data sets. This article represents the proceedings from that session, primarily focusing on emergency department (ED)-related data sets and includes examples of the use of a data set based on ED visits for research purposes. It discusses types of ED-related data sets available, highlights barriers to research use of ED-related data sets, and notes limitations of these data sets. The paper highlights future directions and challenges to using these important sources of data for research, including identification of five main needs related to enhancing the use of ED-related data sets. These are 1) electronic linkage of initial and follow-up ED visits and linkage of information about ED visits to other outcomes, including costs of care, while maintaining deidentification of the data; 2) timely data access with minimal barriers; 3) complete data collection for clinically relevant and/or historical data elements, such as the external cause-of-injury code; 4) easy access to data that can be parsed into smaller jurisdictions (such as states) for policy and/or research purposes, while maintaining confidentiality; and 5) linkages between health survey data and health claims data. ED-related data sets contain much data collected directly from health care facilities, individual patient records, and multiple other sources that have significant potential impact for studying and improving the health of individuals and the population.     

Optimal Older Adult Emergency Care: Introducing Multidisciplinary Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines From the American College of Emergency Physicians,American Geriatrics Society,Emergency Nurses Association,and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

In the United States and around the world, effective, efficient, and reliable strategies to provide emergency care to aging adults is challenging crowded emergency departments (EDs) and a strained health care system. In response, geriatric emergency medicine (EM) clinicians, educators, and researchers collaborated with the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), American Geriatrics Society (AGS), Emergency Nurses Association (ENA), and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) to develop guidelines intended to improve ED geriatric care by enhancing expertise, educational, and quality improvement expectations; equipment; policies; and protocols. These “Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines” represent the first formal society‐led attempt to characterize the essential attribute of the geriatric ED and received formal approval from the boards of directors for each of the four societies in 2013 and 2014. This article is intended to introduce EM and geriatric health care providers to the guidelines, while providing proposals for educational dissemination, refinement via formal effectiveness evaluations and cost‐effectiveness studies, and institutional credentialing.     

CORD‐AEUS: Consensus Document for the Emergency Ultrasound Milestone Project

In 2012, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) designated ultrasound (US) as one of 23 milestone competencies for emergency medicine (EM) residency graduates. With increasing scrutiny of medical educational programs and their effect on patient safety and health care delivery, it is imperative to ensure that US training and competency assessment is standardized. In 2011, a multiorganizational committee composed of representatives from the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD), the Academy of Emergency Ultrasound of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), the Ultrasound Section of the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEM), and the Emergency Medicine Residents' Association was formed to suggest standards for resident emergency ultrasound (EUS) competency assessment and to write a document that addresses the ACGME milestones. This article contains a historical perspective on resident training in EUS and a table of core skills deemed to be a minimum standard for the graduating EM resident. A survey summary of focused EUS education in EM residencies is described, as well as a suggestion for structuring education in residency. Finally, adjuncts to a quantitative measurement of resident competency for EUS are offered.