Cargando…

Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators

OBJECTIVE: Crowding in the emergency department (ED) impacts a number of important quality and safety metrics. We studied ED crowding measures associated with adverse events (AE) resulting from central venous catheters (CVC) inserted in the ED, as well as the relationship between crowding and the fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Theodoro, Daniel L., Vyas, Niraj, Ablordeppey, Enyo, Bausano, Brian, Charshafian, Stephanie, Asaro, Phillip, Griffey, Richard T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7972355/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33856335
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.10.48279
_version_ 1783666697404678144
author Theodoro, Daniel L.
Vyas, Niraj
Ablordeppey, Enyo
Bausano, Brian
Charshafian, Stephanie
Asaro, Phillip
Griffey, Richard T.
author_facet Theodoro, Daniel L.
Vyas, Niraj
Ablordeppey, Enyo
Bausano, Brian
Charshafian, Stephanie
Asaro, Phillip
Griffey, Richard T.
author_sort Theodoro, Daniel L.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Crowding in the emergency department (ED) impacts a number of important quality and safety metrics. We studied ED crowding measures associated with adverse events (AE) resulting from central venous catheters (CVC) inserted in the ED, as well as the relationship between crowding and the frequency of CVC insertions in an ED cohort admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study from 2008–2010 in an academic tertiary care center. Participants undergoing CVC in the ED or admitted to an ICU were categorized by quartile based on the following: National Emergency Department Overcrowding Scale (NEDOCS); waiting room patients (WR); ED patients awaiting inpatient beds (boarders); and ED occupancy (EDO). Main outcomes were the occurrence of an AE during CVC insertion in the ED, and deferred procedures assessed by frequency of CVC insertions in ED patients admitted to the ICU. RESULTS: Of 2,284 ED patients who had a CVC inserted, 293 (13%) suffered an AE. There was no association between AEs from ED CVCs and crowding scales when comparing the highest crowding level or quartile to all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding [13.1%] vs other levels [13.0%], P = 0.98); number of WR patients (14.0% vs 12.7%, P = 0.81); EDO (13.0% vs 12.9%, P = 0.99); and number of boarding patients (12.0% vs 13.3%), P = 0.21). In a cohort of ED patients admitted to the ICU, there was no association between CVC placement rates in the ED and crowding scales comparing the highest vs all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding 16% vs all others 16%, P = 0.97); WR patients (16% vs 16%, P = 0.82), EDO (15% vs. 17%, P = 0.15); and number of boarding patients (17% vs 16%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: In a large, academic tertiary-care center, frequency of CVC insertion in the ED and related AEs were not associated with measures of crowding. These findings add to the evidence that the negative effects of crowding, which impact all ED patients and measures of ED performance, are less likely to impair the delivery of prioritized time-critical interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7972355
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79723552021-03-23 Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators Theodoro, Daniel L. Vyas, Niraj Ablordeppey, Enyo Bausano, Brian Charshafian, Stephanie Asaro, Phillip Griffey, Richard T. West J Emerg Med Patient Safety OBJECTIVE: Crowding in the emergency department (ED) impacts a number of important quality and safety metrics. We studied ED crowding measures associated with adverse events (AE) resulting from central venous catheters (CVC) inserted in the ED, as well as the relationship between crowding and the frequency of CVC insertions in an ED cohort admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study from 2008–2010 in an academic tertiary care center. Participants undergoing CVC in the ED or admitted to an ICU were categorized by quartile based on the following: National Emergency Department Overcrowding Scale (NEDOCS); waiting room patients (WR); ED patients awaiting inpatient beds (boarders); and ED occupancy (EDO). Main outcomes were the occurrence of an AE during CVC insertion in the ED, and deferred procedures assessed by frequency of CVC insertions in ED patients admitted to the ICU. RESULTS: Of 2,284 ED patients who had a CVC inserted, 293 (13%) suffered an AE. There was no association between AEs from ED CVCs and crowding scales when comparing the highest crowding level or quartile to all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding [13.1%] vs other levels [13.0%], P = 0.98); number of WR patients (14.0% vs 12.7%, P = 0.81); EDO (13.0% vs 12.9%, P = 0.99); and number of boarding patients (12.0% vs 13.3%), P = 0.21). In a cohort of ED patients admitted to the ICU, there was no association between CVC placement rates in the ED and crowding scales comparing the highest vs all other quartiles: NEDOCS (dangerous crowding 16% vs all others 16%, P = 0.97); WR patients (16% vs 16%, P = 0.82), EDO (15% vs. 17%, P = 0.15); and number of boarding patients (17% vs 16%, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: In a large, academic tertiary-care center, frequency of CVC insertion in the ED and related AEs were not associated with measures of crowding. These findings add to the evidence that the negative effects of crowding, which impact all ED patients and measures of ED performance, are less likely to impair the delivery of prioritized time-critical interventions. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2021-03 2021-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7972355/ /pubmed/33856335 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.10.48279 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Theodoro et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Patient Safety
Theodoro, Daniel L.
Vyas, Niraj
Ablordeppey, Enyo
Bausano, Brian
Charshafian, Stephanie
Asaro, Phillip
Griffey, Richard T.
Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title_full Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title_fullStr Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title_full_unstemmed Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title_short Central Venous Catheter Adverse Events Are not Associated with Crowding Indicators
title_sort central venous catheter adverse events are not associated with crowding indicators
topic Patient Safety
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7972355/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33856335
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.10.48279
work_keys_str_mv AT theodorodaniell centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT vyasniraj centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT ablordeppeyenyo centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT bausanobrian centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT charshafianstephanie centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT asarophillip centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators
AT griffeyrichardt centralvenouscatheteradverseeventsarenotassociatedwithcrowdingindicators