Can accident and emergency nurse practitioners interpret radiographs? A multicentre study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of nurse practitioners in accident and emergency (A&E) to interpret distal limb radiographs, by comparison with senior house officers. DESIGN: Nurse practitioners and senior house officers in 13 A&E departments or minor injury units were shown 20 radiographs of distal limbs, with brief history and examination findings, and asked to record their interpretation. OUTCOME MEASURE: A total score for each subject was calculated by comparing answers against agreed correct responses. RESULTS: Nurse practitioners in general compared favourably with senior house officers. Those nurse practitioners who interpret radiographs as part of their role in minor injury units performed as well as the experienced senior house officer group. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse practitioners in A&E are able to interpret radiographs to a standard equal to senior house officers with three to five months' experience. Those nurse practitioners actively interpreting radiographs as part of their role in minor injury units are able to interpret radiographs to the same standard as senior house officers with more than five months' experience.     

Notification of infectious diseases by junior doctors in accident and emergency departments.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge about notifiable infectious diseases by accident and emergency (A&E) senior house officers. METHODS: A telephone questionnaire of senior house officers was carried out over a one week period at the end of their six month attachment in A&E departments in Northern Ireland. RESULTS: 81 (91%) of the senior house officers participated in the study; 23 (29%) realised that the doctor diagnosing the notifiable disease had a statutory duty to notify that disease; nine (11%) were aware there were three statutory lists in the United Kingdom. Knowledge about which infectious diseases require notification varied from 79/81 (98%) for meningococcal disease to 15/91 (19%) for methicillin resistant S aureus. Seventy nine (98%) of the doctors thought that a poster displayed in the A&E department would be helpful. There was no significant difference between duration of qualification and performance on the questionnaire (p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Despite varying experience, junior doctors in A&E do not know which infectious diseases are notifiable by statute. They felt that it would be helpful to have a poster in the A&E department listing the notifiable diseases of that region. To encourage accurate reporting, interregional variation between the statutory lists should be abolished and replaced by one nationally agreed list.     

The ability of A&E personnel to demonstrate inhaler technique.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of accident and emergency (A&E) personnel to demonstrate metered dose inhaler technique. METHODS: 25 senior house officers and 25 nurses working in A&E were individually interviewed and assessed on their knowledge of inhaler technique and competence in demonstrating the correct use of a metered dose inhaler. RESULTS: Demonstration of inhaler technique was generally poor by the staff assessed. Although 22 (88%) of the senior house officers were aware of the British Thoracic Society guidelines, only 10 (40%) routinely checked inhaler technique when discharging asthmatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: The A&E department offers an important opportunity for patient assessment and reinforcement of metered dose inhaler technique. Staff should be made aware of the British Thoracic Society guidelines and be competent at assessing and teaching inhaler technique.     

Audit of patients with chest pain presenting to an accident and emergency department over a 6-month period.

The results of a 6-month retrospective audit of patients presenting with chest pain to an accident and emergency (A&E) department to which 46,000 new patients per year present are discussed. The computer diagnostic code assigned to the patients by the A&E doctor, referral rates for second opinion and disposal after assessment in the A&E department are examined, with particular reference to patients who may have had serious cardiac pathology, such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or unstable angina. Audit showed that overall 61% of patients with chest pain of all causes were assessed and discharged home by A&E doctors without recourse to second opinion. Of patients thought by the A&E doctors to have chest pain of cardiac origin, who were referred to the duty medical registrar or cardiologist, 88% were admitted. As a result of these findings a policy of more open referral for second opinion was instituted to reduce the likelihood of discharging patients home with serious cardiac pathology. In addition, the clinical problems of AMI and unstable angina are emphasized to all senior house officers early in their educational programme after joining A&E. Published literature on the diagnosis and misdiagnosis of AMI and unstable angina in the A&E department is reviewed. These studies are almost exclusively from North America, and a need for similar work in the U.K. is discussed.     

Use of a psychiatric proforma for accident and emergency officers.

OBJECTIVE--To devise a proforma for clinical documentation of psychiatric illness in an accident and emergency (A&E) department, since A&E senior house officers (SHOs) have little psychiatric experience before starting their jobs. METHODS--History taking and mental state examinations by 16 SHOs were compared before (n = 50) and after (n = 50) the introduction of the proforma. Comments on the proforma were provided by all participants on a questionnaire. RESULTS--There was an improvement in documentation with the use of the proforma (Mann-Whitney U test, P < 0.001). The senior house officers found the proforma useful and supported further development of this initiative. CONCLUSIONS--A standard form for documenting psychiatric history, designed according to local needs, is useful and should be available in A&E departments.     

Drug history taking and the identification of drug related problems in an accident and emergency department.

OBJECTIVE--To determine the incidence of drug related problems that fail to be noted on casualty cards in patients subsequently admitted, and to compare medication histories as recorded by accident and emergency (A&E) senior house officers (SHOs) and a pharmacist. METHODS--An initial retrospective survey of 1459 acute inpatient admissions through A&E over a three month period was followed by a prospective study of 33 elderly patients. RESULTS--In the retrospective survey, 52 medication related problems were confirmed after examination of the medical records, of which only 16 were identified in A&E. In the prospective study, 125 currently prescribed items were identified by the pharmacist compared to 77 by A&E SHOs; 66% of the missed information was clinically relevant. Of 17 previous adverse drug reactions identified by the pharmacist only six were also recorded by the A&E officer. Only four over the counter medicines were identified by the A&E SHOs compared to 30 by the pharmacist. CONCLUSIONS--More accurate recording of drug history on casualty cards should be undertaken, particularly in respect of over the counter medication and the identification of drug related problems.     

Dental knowledge of accident and emergency senior house officers

Objectives: To determine the dental knowledge of accident and emergency (A&E) senior house officers (SHOs).     

Applied hand anatomy: its importance in accident & emergency.

Hand injuries account for 10-20% of an Accident & Emergency department's workload. Early recognition of serious injury is vital to ensure appropriate management. This is only possible with a good working knowledge of hand anatomy. Forty consecutive A&E senior house officers (SHOs) were assessed on their knowledge of basic hand anatomy. The results are discussed as are the implications for undergraduate and post-graduate training.     

Monteggia fracture-dislocation in children.

Monteggia fracture-dislocations are uncommon in childhood. Correct early diagnosis is essential to avoid elbow dysfunction and the necessity for open reduction of the radial head. This retrospective analysis of 220 forearm fractures in children shows that 50% of Monteggia fractures were misdiagnosed by accident and emergency (A&E) department senior house officers (SHOs) and 25% were misdiagnosed by senior radiologists. Instruction in correct clinical and radiological examination of the elbow joint in children to junior A&E doctors, with early review of suspicious cases by senior medical staff, may help to reduce the incidence of missed Monteggia fractures.     

Should relatives be allowed in the resuscitation room?

OBJECTIVE: To assess doctors' and nurses' views on the presence of relatives in the resuscitation room during cardiac arrest or major trauma. DESIGN: Questionnaires were sent to accident and emergency (A&E) nurses and doctors of all disciplines in a London teaching hospital. Recipients were asked if they would favour the presence of selected relatives in the resuscitation room and to give comments. RESULTS: 103 questionnaires were distributed and 81 returned, a response rate of 78.6%; 33% were senior house officers, 29% consultants, 16% senior registrars/registrars, 12% A&E nurses, and 10% house officers. Of the respondents, 63% were not in favour of relatives being present, and 37% were in favour. The likelihood of being in favour of allowing relatives to be present was high among A&E nurses; among doctors it increased with rising seniority. Most respondents felt that more resuscitation training would be necessary, in addition to counselling for staff and relatives. CONCLUSIONS: Staff with the least experience in dealing with resuscitations and distressed relatives were likely to be opposed to relatives being present in the resuscitation room. As there is evidence that the bereavement process is eased if a partner/relative witnesses the resuscitation, relatives should be offered the opportunity to witness resuscitation if staff training is geared towards the presence of relatives. ALS/ATLS training for all hospital doctors and nurses should include the management of distressed relatives observing a resuscitation.     

Interpretation of trauma radiographs by junior doctors in accident and emergency departments: a cause for concern?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how well junior doctors in accident and emergency (A&E) were able to diagnose significant x ray abnormalities after trauma and to compare their results with those of more senior doctors. METHODS: 49 junior doctors (senior house officers) in A&E were tested with an x ray quiz in a standard way. Their results were compared with 34 consultants and senior registrars in A&E and radiology, who were tested in the same way. The quiz included 30 x rays (including 10 normal films) that had been taken after trauma. The abnormal films all had clinically significant, if sometimes uncommon, diagnoses. The results were compared and analysed statistically. RESULTS: The mean score for the abnormal x rays for all the junior doctors was only 32% correct. The 10 junior doctors were more experience scored significantly better (P < 0.001) but their mean score was only 48%. The mean score of the senior doctors was 80%, which was significantly higher than the juniors (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of junior doctors misdiagnosed significant trauma abnormalities on x ray. Senior doctors scored well, but were not infallible. This suggests that junior doctors are not safe to work on their own in A&E departments. There are implications for training, supervision, and staffing in A&E departments, as well as a need for fail-safe mechanisms to ensure adequate patient care and to improve risk management.     

Management of eye emergencies in the accident and emergency department by senior house officers: a national survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the training that accident and emergency (A&E) senior house officers (SHOs) receive in dealing with eye emergencies, their own perceived level of confidence and competence in managing such cases, and the availability of appropriate equipment in their departments. METHODS: Prospective telephone survey using a standardised structured questionnaire. One SHO from each United Kingdom A&E department listed in the BAEM directory of 1993 was chosen at random and interviewed. RESULTS: 226 A&E departments were contacted and 192 SHOs were successfully interviewed (response rate 84.9%); 26.0% received no training in the management of eye emergencies, 68.8% had only a little or no confidence in dealing with these cases, and 42.2% worked in A&E departments which had no slit lamp. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of adequate basic ophthalmic training for A&E SHOs, leading to a lack of confidence on their part in the management of eye emergencies. In just over 40% of A&E departments in the United Kingdom, the management of these cases may be less than optimal because of the absence of a slit lamp.     

Unnecessary delays in accident and emergency departments: do medical and surgical senior house officers need to vet admissions?

Work was carried out to determine whether patients requiring emergency medical or surgical admission to hospital via accident and emergency (A&E) departments benefit from initial assessment by the ward senior house officer (SHO) as well as the A&E SHO. Two comparable consultant-led A&E departments sharing the same catchment population and receiving similar numbers of new patients each year were studied. A panel of four consultants audited the A&E notes and in-patient records of consecutive emergency medical and surgical patients admitted to two hospitals over the same 6 month period. In one hospital patients were seen and admitted by the A&E SHO alone. In the other hospital patients were seen by the A&E SHO and the medical or surgical SHO from the admitting unit. Diagnostic errors, inappropriate admissions to hospital and admission of patients to inappropriate wards were used as outcome measures. There was no significant difference in the rates of diagnostic error or inappropriate admissions between those patients seen by an A&E SHO only, and those seen in A&E by the A&E and ward SHOs. Detaining emergency medical and surgical patients in the A&E department for further assessment by ward SHOs does not alter inappropriate admission rate or improve diagnostic accuracy.     

Missed myocardial ischaemia in the accident & emergency department: E.C.G. a need for audit?

Accident & Emergency Department Senior House Officers rely heavily on their ECG interpretation skills in the diagnosis and management of patients with chest pain. This prospective double-blind study was designed to test the accuracy with which Accident & Emergency Senior House Officers interpret ECGs, by comparing their interpretation with that of a Consultant Cardiologist. ECGs from 279 of 314 consecutive patients with chest pain were analysed. Ninety per cent of normal electrocardiographs and 57% of abnormal ECGs were correctly interpreted. Despite the inaccurate interpretation of 43% of abnormal ECGs, 96.5% of the patients in the study were considered to have been managed correctly. Audit of all ECGs recorded in the Accident & Emergency Department should be undertaken by someone with experience of ECG interpretation. New A&E staff should receive training in the interpretation of ECGs.     

Senior house officer withdrawals from hospital posts: a questionnaire survey

Objectives: To assess the nature and number of unexpected withdrawal by senior house officers (SHOs) after acceptance of a hospital post at interview, and to investigate the reasons and possible solutions.

Design: Postal questionnaire based study.

Subjects: Medical staffing departments, accident and emergency (A&E) consultants, and withdrawing SHOs in England.

Main outcome measures: Unexpected withdrawals by hospital specialty, three year trend in A&E departments, notice and reasons given, and action taken.

Results: 39% of medical staffing departments reported unexpected withdrawals in a broad spectrum of specialties for February 1998. In the specialty of A&E medicine this occurred in 34% of departments. Overall 72% of A&E departments had experienced this problem over a three year period, and the trend is increasing. The majority of A&E consultants (70%) took no action, and there was a lack of consensus among all respondents on the appropriate course of action to prevent this escalating problem.

Conclusions: Unexpected SHO withdrawal is a substantial issue in hospital medicine and has been increasing in A&E medicine. Measures to prevent this national problem are urgently needed.

     

Radiographic interpretation by nurse practitioners in a minor injuries unit.

OBJECTIVE: To compare nurse practitioners with senior house officers (SHOs) for their ability to request and interpret correctly a limited range of x ray views of patients attending a minor injuries unit. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of case records. METHODS: 150 accident and emergency (A&E) records with x ray requests were randomly selected from the SHOs' first, second, and third 2-month period of their 6-month appointments; 150 record cards were randomly selected from a nearby minor injuries unit over the same period. Copies of the records were reviewed blind and a decision made as to whether x ray requests were appropriate; x ray interpretation was compared with that of a consultant radiologist. RESULTS: 106 x rays were taken on the MIU patients (71%) and 124 on the A&E patients (83%). There was no statistically significant differences in the ability of the nurse practitioners and the SHOs to request and interpret appropriate x rays. In both groups the decision to carry out an x ray was considered appropriate in 70% of patients; x rays were positive in about one third. The sensitivity of radiological interpretation was 93% in both groups, and there were 2% missed positives. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriately trained nursae practitioners are at least as good as SHOs in recognising the need for an x ray and are as competent in their interpretation.     

Decision making in resuscitation from out of hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE--To determine which factors are perceived by senior house officers (SHOs), consultants, and medical registrars in accident and emergency (A&E) medicine as being important in decision making. METHODS--132 SHOs in A&E medicine, of 172 attending an induction course at the start of their job (77%), completed a questionnaire relating to 20 factors of possible importance in decision making; 73 completed the questionnaire at six weeks and 55 at six months. Ten medical registrars and 31 consultants in A&E medicine also completed the questionnaire. RESULTS--The SHOs were able to recognise bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and early advanced I support, as well as the presence of ventricular fibrillation, as important prognostic factors. There was considerable variation in all three groups in their opinions on the importance of the other factors considered. There was no obvious change in SHO responses over the period of training. CONCLUSIONS--Lack of guidelines may result in more patients receiving resuscitation than are salvageable, as doctors maintain a low threshold for continuing resuscitation to avoid missing potential survivors. A decision making algorithm is recommended.     

Section 136, The Mental Health Act 1983; levels of knowledge among accident and emergency doctors,senior nurses,and police constables

Objectives: Section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983 empowers the police to detain those suspected of being mentally ill in public places, and convey them to a place of safety. In practice, accident and emergency (A&E) departments are often used. The authors assessed levels of knowledge of section 136 between A&E doctors, senior nurses, and police constables.

Methods: Doctors and senior nurses in all (A&E) departments in the Yorkshire region were asked to complete a multiple choice tick box type questionnaire, as were police constables from the Humberside Police Force.

Results: 179 completed questionnaires were returned, of which 16 were completed by consultants, 14 by SpRs, 24 by SHOs, 33 by senior nurses, and 92 by police officers. Some 24.1% of A&E staff and 10.9% of police failed to recognise that a person has to appear to be suffering from a mental disorder to be placed on a section 136; 40.2% of police did not know that section 136 is a police power; 55.2% of A&E staff and 14.1% of police incorrectly thought that a person could be placed on a section 136 in their own home; 43.75% of consultants and 50% of SpRs did not consider A&E departments to be a place of safety; 49.4% of A&E staff and 29.3% of police thought that patients could be transferred on a section 136. Only 10.3% of A&E staff and 22.8% of police had received any formal training.

Conclusions: The knowledge among A&E staff and the police of this difficult and complex piece of mental health legislation is poor and requires action through formal education and training. This study not only reflects the levels of knowledge within the groups, it may also reflect the different perceptions of each group as to their role and duties within section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.

     

Attitudes towards general practice and primary care: a survey of senior house officers in accident and emergency.

OBJECTIVES: The attitudes and knowledge of hospital based staff about the capabilities of general practice may be important obstacles to continuity of care and the quality of communication at the primary-secondary care interface. However, little research has sought to investigate such factors or how they change over time. The study aims to assess how senior house officers (SHOs) in accident and emergency (A&E) departments perceive general practice, and to test how attitudes change during their six months' tenure. METHODS: Questionnaires were sent to all A&E SHOs working in the 27 A&E departments in South Thames region. At the end of the first month and at the end of the sixth months SHOs were asked to respond using 100 mm visual analogue scales to statements about the quality of general practitioner (GP) services in their area and their attitudes towards treating primary care patients in A&E. RESULTS: After sending reminders, 135 (79%) SHOs responded to the questionnaire at the end of the first month, and 115 (67%) responded to the questionnaire at the end of the sixth month; 104 (61%) responded to both. Statements relating to GP accessibility within and outside normal working hours, perceptions of patients' satisfaction with GP services, GPs' effectiveness in educating patients about use of services, and the frustrations and lack of reward of treating primary care patients scored most negatively. The overall trend was for attitudes to become more negative during SHOs' period of employment in A&E, particularly for those intent on hospital specialist careers or those working within London hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate the extent to which attitudes become more entrenched over time. This may lead to care that is more hospital focused. These issues need to be addressed if quality improvement is to occur across the A&E-primary care interface.     

Emergency intubation of infants: does laryngoscope blade design make any difference?

OBJECTIVE: To compare intubation times and ease of use for a range of infant laryngoscope blades in the hands of accident and emergency (A&E) personnel. METHODS: Seven different blades were compared in terms of intubation times and ease of use scores in the hands of 30 A&E senior house officers (SHOs) and nurses using a standard infant manikin. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in intubation times between the seven blades (p < 0.001). Intubation with two blade designs (Seward and Soper) took almost twice as long as for the other blades (p < 0.05). Subjective ease of use scoring also identified the Seward and Soper blades as being the most difficult to use (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between SHO and nurse intubation times or ease of use scoring. Successful intubation was achieved within 30 seconds in 90% of attempts. All but two of the subjects used an incorrect levering technique for intubation despite all having previously received training in infant intubation. CONCLUSIONS: No current standard exists regarding the utilisation of infant laryngoscope blades in the A&E department. The first line blade available should be a C shaped blade (Miller, Oxford, Robert-shaw, or Wisconsin). Other blade designs should be kept for use only by more experienced personnel or in difficult intubation situations. Intubation training must focus on correct technique and regular assessment is essential.