Patients in the emergency department (ED) who have been admitted to hospital (inpatient “boarders”) are associated with ED overcrowding. They are also a symptom of a hospital-wide imbalance between demand and supply of resources. We analyzed the trends of inpatient admissions, ED boarding volumes, lengths of stay and bed resources of 3 major admitting services at our teaching institution.

We used hospital databases from Jan. 1, 2004, to Dec. 31, 2007, to analyze ED visits that resulted in admission to hospital.

During the study period, 21 986 ED patients were admitted to hospital. The percentage of cancer-related admissions to the oncology admitting service decreased from 48% in 2004 to 24% in 2007, and admissions to general internal medicine (GIM) increased nearly 2-fold, from 28% in 2004 to 54% in 2007. In addition, GIM admitted about 10% more myocardial infarction and heart failure patients than did cardiology. General internal medicine constituted the majority of ED boarders and had a median boarding length of stay of approximately 15 hours. Inpatient beds on oncology and cardiology services remained static.

Without bed capacity to admit more patients, our specialty services relied on GIM to serve as a safety net. At the same time, GIM was cited as a main source of ED congestion as their patients occupied more ED beds for longer periods than any other admitting service. The data presented in this study has helped effect positive change within our institution. Other hospitals running at or near capacity and faced with similar ED congestion may apply the methods we used in this study to analyze the cause and nature of their situation.

Training in practical aspects of disaster medicine is often impossible, and simulation may offer an educational opportunity superior to traditional didactic methods. We sought to determine whether exposure to an electronic simulation tool would improve the ability of medical students to manage a simulated disaster.

We stratified 22 students by year of education and randomly assigned 50% from each category to form the intervention group, with the remaining 50% forming the control group. Both groups received the same didactic training sessions. The intervention group received additional disaster medicine training on a patient simulator (disastermed.ca), and the control group spent equal time on the simulator in a nondisaster setting. We compared markers of patient flow during a simulated disaster, including mean differences in time and number of patients to reach triage, bed assignment, patient assessment and disposition. In addition, we compared triage accuracy and scores on a structured command-and-control instrument. We collected data on the students' evaluations of the course for secondary purposes.

Participants in the intervention group triaged their patients more quickly than participants in the control group (mean difference 43 s, 99.5% confidence interval [CI] 12 to 75 s). The score of performance indicators on a standardized scale was also significantly higher in the intervention group (18/18) when compared with the control group (8/18) (p < 0.001). All students indicated that they preferred the simulation-based curriculum to a lecture-based curriculum. When asked to rate the exercise overall, both groups gave a median score of 8 on a 10-point modified Likert scale.

Participation in an electronic disaster simulation using the disastermed.ca software package appears to increase the speed at which medical students triage simulated patients and increase their score on a structured command-and-control performance indicator instrument. Participants indicated that the simulation-based curriculum in disaster medicine is preferable to a lecture-based curriculum. Overall student satisfaction with the simulation-based curriculum was high.

We sought to examine scholarly outcomes of the projects receiving research grants from the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) during the first 10 years of national funding (i.e., between 1996 and 2005).

We sent email surveys to 62 emergency medicine (EM) researchers who received funding from CAEP. We focused our data collection on grant deliverables and opinions using a 1–7 Likert scale with regard to the value of the award.

Fifty-eight recipients responded to our survey. Grants were most commonly awarded to residents (21 [36%]), followed by senior (16 [28%]) and junior (13 [22%]) emergency staff. Twenty-six applicants from Ontario and 11 from Quebec received the majority of the grants. Overall, 51 projects were completed at the time of contact and, from these, 39 manuscripts were published or in press. Abstract presentations were more common, with a median of 2 abstracts presented per completed project. Abstract presentations for the completed projects were documented locally (23), nationally (39) and internationally (37). Overall, 19 projects received additional funding. The median amount funded was Can$4700 with an interquartile range of $3250–$5000. Respondents felt CAEP funding was critical to completing their projects and felt strongly that dedicated EM research funding should be continued to stimulate productivity.

Overall, the CAEP Research Grants Competition has produced impressive results. Despite the small sums available, the grants have been important for ensuring study completion and for securing additional funding. CAEP and similar EM organizations need to develop a more robust funding approach so that larger grant awards and more researchers can be supported on an annual basis.

We compared pain severity and time to resumption of activities in patients with cervical strains treated with a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), a centrally acting muscle relaxant or both.

We performed a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of adults with cervical strains from motor vehicle collisions or from falls who presented to a suburban academic emergency department (ED). Patients were randomly assigned to receive ibuprofen 800 mg, cyclobenzaprine 5 mg or both, 3 times daily as needed for up to 7 days. Outcome measures included a pain score on a 100-mm visual analog scale, pain relief scores, the time to resumption of normal activities, the use of rescue medications, and adverse outcomes. We used repeated-measures analysis of variance to compare pain relief over time. Our sample size of 20 patients in each group had a power of 80% to detect a difference of 15 mm in pain relief scores between the highest and lowest groups.

We randomly assigned 61 patients to receive ibuprofen (n = 20), cyclobenzaprine (n = 21) or both (n = 20). Mean (standard deviation) age was 34 (11) years; 58% were women and 72% were white. Although pain scores improved over time in all groups, there were no significant differences between the groups in any of the outcome measures. The rate of adverse events was also similar between groups.

Our study suggests that there is little benefit to routinely using or adding cyclobenzaprine to NSAIDs for ED patients with acute cervical strain.

We sought to assess the applicability of the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in the prehospital setting by comparing CTAS scores assigned during ambulance transportation by base hospital (BH) nurses with CTAS scores given by emergency department (ED) nurses on patients' arrival.

We recruited a prospective sample of consecutive patients who were transported to the ED by ambulance between December 2006 and March 2007 for whom a contact was made with the BH. Patients were triaged by the BH nurse with online communication and vital signs transmission. On arrival, patients were blindly triaged again by the ED nurse. We used the quadratic weighted κ statistic to measure the agreement between the 2 CTAS scores.

Ninety-four patients were triaged twice by 2 nursing teams (9 nurses at the BH and 39 nurses in the ED). The agreement obtained on prehospital and ED CTAS scores was moderate (κ = 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.37–0.63).

The moderate interrater agreement we obtained may be a result of the changing conditions of patients during transport or may indicate that CTAS scoring requires direct contact to produce reliable triage scores. Our study casts a serious doubt on the appropriateness of BH nurses performing triage with CTAS in the prehospital setting.

In recognition of patient wait times, and deteriorating patient and staff satisfaction, we set out to improve these measures in our emergency department (ED) without adding any new funding or beds.

In 2005 all staff in the ED at Hôtel-Dieu Grace Hospital began a transformation, employing Toyota Lean manufacturing principles to improve ED wait times and quality of care. Lean techniques such as value-stream mapping, just-in-time delivery techniques, workplace organization, reduction of systemic wastes, use of the worker as the source of quality improvement and ongoing refinement of our process steps formed the basis of our project.

Our ED has achieved major improvements in departmental flow without adding any additional ED or inpatient beds. The mean registration to physician time has decreased from 111 minutes to 78 minutes. The number of patients who left without being seen has decreased from 7.1% to 4.3%. The length of stay (LOS) for discharged patients has decreased from a mean of 3.6 to 2.8 hours, with the largest decrease seen in our patients triaged at levels 4 or 5 using the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale. We noted an improvement in ED patient satisfaction scores following the implementation of Lean principles.

Lean manufacturing principles can improve the flow of patients through the ED, resulting in greater patient satisfaction along with reduced time spent by the patient in the ED.