CJEM Articles: Shelley L. McLeod
Displaying 1-2 of 2 results
-
May
2010
12
3
Justin W. Yan, Karl D. Theakston, Marcia L. Edmonds, Robert J. Sedran, Shelley L. McLeod
Objective: Computed tomography (CT) is an imaging modality used to detect renal stones. However, there is concern about the lifetime cumulative radiation exposure attributed to CT. Ultrasonography (US) has been used to diagnose urolithiasis, thereby avoiding radiation exposure. The objective of this study was to determine the ability of US to identify renal colic patients with a low risk of requiring urologic intervention within 90 days of their initial emergency department (ED) visit.
Methods: We completed a retrospective medical record review for all adult patients who underwent ED-ordered renal US for suspected urolithiasis over a 1-year period. Independent, double data extraction was performed for all imaging reports and US results were categorized as “normal,” “suggestive of ureterolithiasis,” “ureteric stone seen” or “disease unrelated to urolithiasis.” Charts were reviewed to determine how many patients underwent subsequent CT and urologic intervention.
Results: Of the 817 renal US procedures ordered for suspected urolithiasis during the study period, the results of 352 (43.2%) were classified as normal, and only 2 (0.6%) of these patients required urologic intervention. The results of 177 (21.7%) renal US procedures were suggestive of ureterolithiasis. Of these, 12 (6.8%) patients required urologic intervention. Of the 241 (29.5%) patients who had a ureteric stone seen on US, 15 (6.2%) required urologic intervention. The rate of urologic intervention was significantly lower in those with normal results on US (p < 0.001) than in those with abnormal results on US.
Conclusion: A normal result on renal US predicts a low likelihood for urologic intervention within 90 days for adult ED patients with suspected urolithiasis.
-
July
2009
11
4
Chris K. Anderson, Gregory S. Zaric, Jonathan F. Dreyer, Michael W. Carter, Shelley L. McLeod
Introduction: 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.
Methods: 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.
Results: 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.
Conclusion: 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.
