Studies indicate that a student's career interest at medical school entry is related to his or her ultimate career. We sought to determine the level of interest in emergency medicine among students at the time of medical school entry, and to describe characteristics associated with students primarily interested in emergency medicine.

We surveyed students in 18 medical school classes from 8 Canadian universities between 2001 and 2004 at the commencement of their studies. Participants listed their top career choice and the degree to which a series of variables influenced their choices. We also collected demographic data.

Of 2420 surveys distributed, 2168 (89.6%) were completed. A total of 6.1% (95% confidence interval 5.1%–7.1%) of respondents cited emergency medicine as their first career choice. When compared with students primarily interested in family medicine, those primarily interested in emergency medicine reported a greater influence of hospital orientation and a lesser influence of social orientation on their career choice. When compared with students primarily interested in the surgical specialties, those primarily interested in emergency medicine were more likely to report medical lifestyle and varied scope of practice as important influences. When compared with students primarily interested in the medical specialties, those who reported interest in emergency medicine were more likely to report that a hospital orientation and varied scope of practice were important influences, and less likely to report that social orientation was important.

Students primarily interested in emergency medicine at medical school entry have attributes that differentiate them from students primarily interested in family medicine, the surgical specialties or the medical specialties. These findings may help guide future initiatives regarding emergency medicine education.

With the proclamation of Bill 110 in September 2005, Ontario became the first jurisdiction in Canada to mandate that gunshot wounds (GSWs) be reported to authorities. We sought to evaluate the impact of Bill 110, including the awareness of, experience with and opinions about the new law among Ontario emergency physicians (EPs), the public and the police.

An online survey was distributed to all members of the Section on Emergency Medicine at the Ontario Medical Association. The public survey consisted of 3 closed questions and was performed by the polling firm Ipsos-Reid by telephone. Police opinion was requested through the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services of the Ontario government.

The physician response rate was 25%. The great majority of respondents were aware of the law (93%) and willing to comply (88%), but only half were sure of their obligations and the penalties. Since the law had been proclaimed, the majority (51%) had seen at least 1 GSW victim. Seventy-nine percent reported no problems with either the police or the bill, and 86% perceived no change in relations with patients. Six incidents of patients delaying care were reported. Of the public surveyed, two-thirds were aware of the law. After being informed of the law, almost all (95%) expressed support, and the majority (80%) felt it would not change their relationship with their treating physician. All 47 members of the Ontario Provincial Police who were surveyed agreed that Bill 110 is helpful for shooting investigations, 8 reported that they had personally been involved in cases initiated by a report and 6 had been involved in cases where charges were laid or weapons confiscated. Data on actual reports and results of investigations were not available.

Bill 110 seems to have been broadly accepted by the emergency community and endorsed by the public.

A full understanding of an injury event and the mechanical forces involved should be important for predicting specific anatomical patterns of injury. Yet, information on the mechanism of injury is often overlooked as a predictor for specific anatomical injury in clinical decision-making. We measured the relationship between mechanism of injury and risk for cervical spine fracture.

Our case-control study is a secondary analysis of data collected from the Canadian C-Spine Rule (CCR) study. Data were collected from 1996 to 2002 and included patients presenting to the emergency departments of 9 tertiary care centres after sustaining acute blunt trauma to the head or neck. Cases are defined as patients who were categorized in the CCR study with a clinically important cervical spine fracture. Controls had no radiologic evidence of cervical spine injury. Bivariate and multivariate unconditional logistic regression models were used. Results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Among the 17 208 patients in the CCR study, 320 (2%) received a diagnosis of a cervical spine fracture. Axial loads, falls, diving incidents and nontraffic motorized vehicle collisions (e.g., collisions involving snowmobiles or all-terrain vehicles) were injury mechanisms that were significantly related to a higher risk of fracture. For motor vehicle collisions, the risk of cervical spine injury increased with the posted speed, being involved in a head-on collision or a rollover, or not wearing a seat belt (p < 0.05). The occurrence of cervical spine fracture was negligible in simple rear-end collisions (1 in 3694 cases; OR 0.015, 95% CI 0.002–0.104]).

Our study quantitatively demonstrates the relationship between specific mechanisms of injury and the risk of a cervical spine fracture. A full understanding of the injury mechanism would assist providers of emergency health care in assessing risk for injury in trauma patients.

Our objective was to determine whether the addition of a broad-scope nurse practitioner (NP) would improve emergency department (ED) wait times, ED lengths of stay (LOS) and left-without-treatment (LWOT) rates. We hypothesized that the addition of a broad-scope NP during weekday ED shifts would result in shorter patient wait times, reduced LOS and fewer patients leaving the ED without treatment.

This prospective observational study was conducted in a busy urban free-standing community ED. Intervention shifts, with NP coverage, were compared with control shifts (similar shifts with emergency physicians [EPs] working independently). Primary outcomes included patient wait times, ED LOS and LWOT rates. Patient demographics, triage category, the provider seen, the time to provider and ED LOS were captured using an electronic database.

The addition of an NP was associated with a 12% increase in patient volume per shift and a 7-minute reduction in mean wait times for low-acuity patients. However, overall patient wait times and ED LOS did not differ between intervention and control shifts. During intervention shifts, EPs saw a smaller proportion of low-acuity patients and there was a trend toward a lower proportion of LWOT patients (11.9% v. 13.7%, p = 0.10).

Adding a broad-scope NP to the ED staff may lower the proportion of patients who leave without treatment, reduce the proportion of low-acuity patients seen by EPs and expedite throughput for a subgroup of less urgent patients. However, it did not reduce overall wait times or ED LOS in this setting.

The Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) is a 5-level triage tool used to determine the priority by which patients should be treated in Canadian emergency departments (EDs). To determine emergency physician (EP) workload and staffing needs, many hospitals in Ontario use a case-mix formula based solely on patient volume at each triage level. The purpose of our study was to describe the distribution of EP time by activity during a shift in order to estimate the amount of time required by an EP to assess and treat patients in each triage category and to determine the variability in the distribution of CTAS scoring between hospital sites.

Research assistants directly observed EPs for 592 shifts and electronically recorded their activities on a moment-by-moment basis. The duration of all activities associated with a given patient were summed to derive a directly observed estimate of the amount of EP time required to treat the patient.

We observed treatment times for 11 716 patients in 11 hospital-based EDs. The mean time for physicians to treat patients was 73.6 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] 63.6–83.7) for CTAS level 1, 38.9 minutes (95% CI 36.0–41.8) for CTAS-2, 26.3 minutes (95% CI 25.4–27.2) for CTAS-3, 15.0 minutes (95% CI 14.6–15.4) for CTAS-4 and 10.9 minutes (95% CI 10.1–11.6) for CTAS-5. Physician time related to patient care activities accounted for 84.2% of physicians' ED shifts.

In our study, EPs had very limited downtime. There was significant variability in the distribution of CTAS scores between sites and also marked variation in EP time related to each triage category. This brings into question the appropriateness of using CTAS alone to determine physician staffing levels in EDs.

We evaluated the validity of the Canadian Paediatric Triage and Acuity Scale (Paed-CTAS) for children visiting a pediatric emergency department (ED).

This was a retrospective study evaluating all children who presented to a pediatric university-affiliated ED during a 1-year period. Data were retrieved from the ED database. Information regarding triage and disposition was registered in an ED database by a clerk following patient management. In the absence of a gold standard for triage, admission to hospital, admission to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and length of stay (LOS) in the ED were used as surrogate markers of severity. The primary outcome measure was the correlation between triage level (from 1 to 5) and admission to hospital. The correlation between triage level and dichotomous outcomes was evaluated by a χ2 test and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the association between triage level and ED LOS.

Over the 1-year period, 58 529 patients were triaged in the ED. The proportion admitted to hospital was 63% for resuscitation (level 1), 37% for emergent (level 2), 14% for urgent (level 3), 2% for semiurgent (level 4) and 1% for nonurgent (level 5) (p < 0.001). There was also a good correlation between triage levels and LOS and admission to PICU (both p < 0.001).

This computerized version of PaedCTAS demonstrates a strong association with admission to hospital, admission to PICU and LOS in the ED. These results suggest that PaedCTAS is a valid tool for triage of children in a pediatric ED.

Patients with acute headache often undergo computed tomography (CT) followed by a lumbar puncture to rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage. Our international study examined current practice, the perceived need for a clinical decision rule for acute headache and the required sensitivity for such a rule.

We approached 2100 emergency physicians from 4 countries (Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States) to participate in our survey by sampling the membership of their emergency associations. We used a modified Dillman technique with 3–5 notifications and a prenotification letter employing a combination of electronic mail and postal mail. Physicians were questioned about neurologically intact patients who presented with headache. Analysis included both descriptive statistics for the entire sample and stratification by country.

The total response rate was 54.7% (1149/2100). Respondents were primarily male (75.5%), with a mean age of 42.5 years and a mean 12.3 years of emergency department (ED) experience. Of the physicians who responded, 49.5% thought all acute headache patients should be investigated with CT and 57.4% felt CT should always be followed by lumbar puncture. Of the respondents, 95.7% reported they would consider using a clinical decision rule for patients with acute headache to rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage. Respondents deemed the median sensitivity required by such a rule to be 99% (interquartile range 98%–99%). Approximately 1 in 5 physicians suggested that 100% sensitivity was required.

Emergency physicians report that they would welcome a clinical decision rule for headache that would determine which patients require costly or invasive tests to rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage. The required sensitivity of such a rule was realistic. These results will inform and inspire the development of clinical decision rules for acute headache in the ED.

We sought to determine whether a standardized emergency department (ED) asthma care pathway (ACP) for adults would be accepted by ED staff, improve adherence to Canadian ED asthma management guidelines and improve patient outcomes.

Ten Ontario hospital EDs (5 intervention, 5 control) participated in a 5-month pre–post intervention study. Emergency department management, admissions, repeat ED visits and ED length of stay were compared between sites and by ACP use versus nonuse at intervention sites.

The ACP was used in 101 of 383 visits (26.4%) at 5 intervention sites. Use of the ACP varied significantly between sites, ranging from 6% to 60% (p < 0.001). When compared with control sites, there were significant increases in the use of metered dose inhalers (MDIs), inhaled steroids, referrals, documentation of teaching, patient recollection of teaching (all with a p < 0.001) and oxygen (p = 0.001). Use of peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) measurements decreased in both intervention and control sites. Increased PEFR documentation and systemic steroid use in the ED and on discharge were only found in patients who were on the ACP at intervention sites. Admissions increased from 3.9% to 9.4% at intervention sites in contrast to control sites, where they remained fairly stable (p = 0.016), but did not differ by ACP use. The length of stay for discharged patients increased by a mean of 16 minutes for ACP patients at intervention sites (p = 0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in repeat ED visits.

Adoption of a standardized ED ACP for adults is highly variable. Despite modest uptake, which averaged 26%, beneficial changes in specific aspects of asthma care delivery were found, notably in referrals and recollection of teaching done during the ED visit, without a substantial increase in ED length of stay. These changes may lead to improvements in outcomes, such as reduced relapse rates, which this study was not designed or powered to detect. Provincial and national implementation strategies that address barriers to clinical pathway adoption are warranted and have the potential to improve adherence to guidelines and outcomes for asthma patients.

Alcohol is a significant risk factor for injury, and is one of the leading causes of death, disability and premature mortality among young Canadians. This paper provides an overview of alcohol-related injury among adolescents and young adults presenting to Canadian emergency departments (EDs).

We reviewed records from the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program database during the 4-year period between 2000 and 2003. We included individuals younger than 25 years who presented to EDs in 11 pediatric and general hospitals with injuries for which alcohol, either alone or in conjunction with drugs, was recorded as a contributing factor. We examined key socio-demographic and injury-related factors associated with alcohol and drug-related injuries, including intent and disposition.

Alcohol was identified as a factor in 2389 injuries during this 4-year period; 408 (17%) of these cases also involved drug use. Approximately 55% of these patients were male and the majority was between 15 and 19 years of age. Unintentional injuries were the most common presentation, self-harm injuries were more common among female patients and violence-related injuries were more common among male patients. Most patients received treatment for their injuries. However, as age increased, outcome differences were observed between sexes.

Alcohol-related injuries are increasing among Canadian youth. These findings highlight the importance of obtaining thorough drug and alcohol histories and measurement, when appropriate, for adolescents and young adults presenting to EDs with injuries.

Emergency physicians (EPs) rarely find out what happens to patients after the patients leave their care, a process we call “outcome feedback.” Some suggest this hinders the practice of emergency medicine (EM); however, evidence is lacking. We sought to evaluate EPs' perception of the current and potential role of outcome feedback in EM.

We surveyed practising French- and English-speaking EPs from emergency departments within 100 km of Ottawa, Ont., in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. The main outcomes included the prevalence, role and effect of outcome feedback.

Of the 297 physicians surveyed, 231 (77.8%) responded. The sample contained good representation of language groups, practice settings, sexes and age groups. All participants indicated that knowing outcomes is “essential” (62.6%) or “beneficial” (37.4%) to gaining experience in EM. Participants reported currently receiving passive outcome feedback in 10.0% of all cases, and seeking out (active) outcome feedback in 7.5% of all cases. The great majority of participants (97.3%) stated that they would like to receive more outcome feedback and believed that this would improve diagnostic accuracy (97.3%), clinical efficiency (85.5%), treatment outcomes (95.6%) and job satisfaction (95.1%). When asked to indicate “any possible negative effects that might arise from increased outcome feedback,” 62.1% indicated none. However, 17.9% hypothesized negative emotional effects and 11.5% suggested increased time requirements.

The overwhelming majority of EPs receive very little outcome feedback. Most would like more outcome feedback and believe it would improve the practice of EM.

Medical licensing bodies and professional colleges require their members to maintain a broad spectrum of knowledge, skills and attitudes, which, when taken together, define a competent emergency physician (EP). The objectives of this pilot study were: 1) to determine the resources used by academic EPs to maintain competence and 2) to determine academic EPs' learning priorities.

Using a modified Dillman method, we surveyed EPs from 2 Canadian academic tertiary health sciences centres.

Thirty-seven (68.5%) of 54 EPs responded. Of those responding, 14 (37.8%) attended grand rounds 3 times or more annually, and 34 (91.7%) attended a medical conference or course at least once annually. Thirty-three (89.2%) respondents read journal articles at least once monthly, with 22 (59.5%) of those reading synopses of original articles. Twenty-three (62.1%) received clinical updates via email, and 11 (29.7%) subscribed to an audio journal or podcast of reviews of original research. Among the CanMEDS roles, Medical Expert, Scholar and Manager were selected as top professional development priorities by more than one-third of respondents. The topics that were not selected as priorities by respondents included patient communication and charting (Communicator); conflict resolution skills and teamwork abilities (Collaborator); advocate for patient and promote health in emergency department populations (Health Advocate) and ethical conflict resolution (Professional).

The results of this pilot study suggest that in order to maintain clinical competence in emergency medicine, traditional formats of professional development (e.g., grand rounds, print media and original research) are being substituted for independent study, online media and reviews of original research. This study also suggests a strong preference for Medical Expert topics, while Professional, Health Advocate, Collaborator and Communicator topics are not a reported priority for professional development.