Cargando…

Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit

OBJECTIVE: In response to concerns about patient care and safety, our urban, tertiary care, Level 1 trauma center adult emergency department (ED) created an advanced practice provider‐staffed critical care step‐down unit (CCSU). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the CCSU's impact on pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murphy, Lisa, Paolucci, Gino, Pittenger, Laura, Akande, Morayo, Marks, Sarah J., Merchant, Roland C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7493497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33000062
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12094
_version_ 1783582577521590272
author Murphy, Lisa
Paolucci, Gino
Pittenger, Laura
Akande, Morayo
Marks, Sarah J.
Merchant, Roland C.
author_facet Murphy, Lisa
Paolucci, Gino
Pittenger, Laura
Akande, Morayo
Marks, Sarah J.
Merchant, Roland C.
author_sort Murphy, Lisa
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: In response to concerns about patient care and safety, our urban, tertiary care, Level 1 trauma center adult emergency department (ED) created an advanced practice provider‐staffed critical care step‐down unit (CCSU). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the CCSU's impact on patient care, safety, and ED operations. METHODS: We compared ED length of stay, return visits to the ED within 72 hours, billing code assignments (current procedural terminology evaluation and management [CPT E&M] codes), and quality of electronic health record documentation per QNOTE for the 2 years after the CCSU was initiated (CCSU period) versus before its initiation (pre‐CCSU period). RESULTS: There were 31,418 critical care ED patient visits in the pre‐CCSU period and 33,396 in the CCSU period. Median ED length of stay did not change overall between the CCSU versus pre‐CCSU period (∆1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = −2.4, 4.4] minutes), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆‐4 [95% CI = −7.8, −0.2] minutes). 72‐hour return ED visits also did not change overall (∆0% [95% CI = −0.1, 0]), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆0.4% [95% CI = −0.05, −0.4]). CPT E&M billing increased for highest‐level visits (99,291: ∆1.3% [95% CI= 0.5, 2.0]). Quality of electronic health record documentation as measured by QNOTE also improved (∆11.5% [95% CI = 4.9, 18.1]). CONCLUSION: This ED's CCSU performance metrics indicate at least moderate improvement in ED length of stay, 72‐hour return visits, critical care patient billing, and electronic health record documentation. EDs elsewhere can consider implementation of this advanced practice provider‐staffed solution to improvement in critical care in ED.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7493497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74934972020-09-29 Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit Murphy, Lisa Paolucci, Gino Pittenger, Laura Akande, Morayo Marks, Sarah J. Merchant, Roland C. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open The Practice of Emergency Medicine OBJECTIVE: In response to concerns about patient care and safety, our urban, tertiary care, Level 1 trauma center adult emergency department (ED) created an advanced practice provider‐staffed critical care step‐down unit (CCSU). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the CCSU's impact on patient care, safety, and ED operations. METHODS: We compared ED length of stay, return visits to the ED within 72 hours, billing code assignments (current procedural terminology evaluation and management [CPT E&M] codes), and quality of electronic health record documentation per QNOTE for the 2 years after the CCSU was initiated (CCSU period) versus before its initiation (pre‐CCSU period). RESULTS: There were 31,418 critical care ED patient visits in the pre‐CCSU period and 33,396 in the CCSU period. Median ED length of stay did not change overall between the CCSU versus pre‐CCSU period (∆1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = −2.4, 4.4] minutes), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆‐4 [95% CI = −7.8, −0.2] minutes). 72‐hour return ED visits also did not change overall (∆0% [95% CI = −0.1, 0]), but decreased for patients who remained in the critical care suites (∆0.4% [95% CI = −0.05, −0.4]). CPT E&M billing increased for highest‐level visits (99,291: ∆1.3% [95% CI= 0.5, 2.0]). Quality of electronic health record documentation as measured by QNOTE also improved (∆11.5% [95% CI = 4.9, 18.1]). CONCLUSION: This ED's CCSU performance metrics indicate at least moderate improvement in ED length of stay, 72‐hour return visits, critical care patient billing, and electronic health record documentation. EDs elsewhere can consider implementation of this advanced practice provider‐staffed solution to improvement in critical care in ED. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7493497/ /pubmed/33000062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12094 Text en © 2020 The Authors. JACEP Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American College of Emergency Physicians. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle The Practice of Emergency Medicine
Murphy, Lisa
Paolucci, Gino
Pittenger, Laura
Akande, Morayo
Marks, Sarah J.
Merchant, Roland C.
Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title_full Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title_fullStr Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title_short Evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
title_sort evaluation of an advanced practice provider emergency department critical care step‐down unit
topic The Practice of Emergency Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7493497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33000062
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/emp2.12094
work_keys_str_mv AT murphylisa evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit
AT paoluccigino evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit
AT pittengerlaura evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit
AT akandemorayo evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit
AT markssarahj evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit
AT merchantrolandc evaluationofanadvancedpracticeprovideremergencydepartmentcriticalcarestepdownunit