Managing LBP via clinical practice guidelines in healthcare settings is recommended, yet burgeoning evidence suggests adherence is suboptimal in emergency department settings. Whether adherence differs between public and private settings is unknown. A retrospective audit of two Australian emergency departments matched 86 private patients to 86 public patients by age ( ± 5 years), sex (male/female) and LBP duration (first time/history of LBP). Patient charts were reviewed according to the Australian clinical guidelines for the management of LBP. Guidelines were considered individually and via a collective guideline adherence score (GAS). Management GAS was lower in private patients compared to public patients (d [95 %CI]: -0.67 [-0.98, -0.36], P < 0.001). Public patients were more likely to have documentation of guideline-based advice (OR [95 %CI]: 4.4 [2.4, 8.4], P < 0.001) and less likely to be sent for imaging (OR [95 %CI]: 5.0 [2.6, 9.4], P < 0.001). Private patients were more likely to have documented screening for psychosocial risk factors (OR [95 %CI]: 21.8 [9.1, 52.1], P < 0.001) and more likely to receive guideline-based medication prescriptions at patient discharge (OR [95 %CI]: 2.2 [1.2, 4.2], P = 0.013). Differences exist in public and private hospital emergency department guideline adherence. Exploring barriers and facilitators underpinning these differences will assist in guiding future implementation science approaches.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the availability of geriatrics-friendly protocols, pieces of equipment, and physical environments alongside potential opportunities of improvement in the emergency departments of our country.
METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted between the 1st and 29th of February, in the year 2024, within the AI, AII, B group- and university hospitals in Turkey. A questionnaire form consisting of three subdivisions in which general pieces of information, information regarding appropriate personnel/management for geriatrics-friendly emergency departments, equipment/materials, and the presence of physical environments was presented online to the participants and the responses that were provided online were evaluated.
RESULTS: The study was conducted with a total of 175 participants from hospital emergency departments. The number of hospitals with monthly older patient application amounts of 500 and above was 133 (76.0%). It was observed that personnel/management knowledge was, relative to guideline suggestions, at low levels. When the appropriateness of personnel/management knowledge and total equipment/materials were compared to hospital roles, it was determined that university hospitals adhered closest to the guideline and that inter-group differences were significant (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: It was determined that the compliance of emergency departments in Turkey with the criteria specified in the geriatric emergency department guidelines is at very low levels.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) care is provided for a diverse range of patients, clinical acuity and conditions. This diversity often calls for different vital signs monitoring requirements. Requirements often change depending on the circumstances that patients experience during episodes of ED care.
OBJECTIVE: To describe expert consensus on vital signs monitoring during ED care in the Australasian setting to inform the content of a joint Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA) position statement on vital signs monitoring in the ED.
METHODS: A 4-hour online nominal group technique workshop with follow up surveys.
RESULTS: Twelve expert ED nurses and doctors from adult, paediatric and mixed metropolitan and regional ED and research facilities spanning four Australian states participated in the workshop and follow up surveys. Consensus building generated 14 statements about vital signs monitoring in ED. Good consensus was reached on whether vital signs should be assessed for 15 of 19 circumstances that patients may experience.
CONCLUSIONS: This study informed the creation of a joint position statement on vital signs monitoring in the Australasian ED setting, endorsed by CENA and ACEM. Empirical evidence is needed for optimal, safe and achievable policy on this fundamental practice.

The Royal College of Emergency Medicine Toxicology Special Interest Group in collaboration with the UK National Poisons Information Service and the Clinical Toxicology Department at Guy\'s and St Thomas\' NHS Foundation Trust has produced guidance to support clinicians working in the ED with the assessment and management of adults with acute opioid toxicity.Considerations regarding identification of acute opioid toxicity are discussed and recommendations regarding treatment options and secondary prevention are made. There is a focus on making recommendations on the best available evidence.

OBJECTIVE: To describe other reasons for requesting HIV serology in emergency departments (ED) other than the 6 defined in the SEMES-GESIDA consensus document (DC-SEMES-GESIDA) and to analyze whether it would be efficient to include any of them in the future.
METHODS: Review of all HIV serologies performed during 2 years in 20 Catalan EDs. Serologies requested for reasons not defined by the DC-SEMES-GESIDA were grouped by common conditions, the prevalence (IC95%) of seropositivity for each condition was calculated, and those whose 95% confidence lower limit was >0.1% were considered efficient. Sensitivity analysis considered that serology would have been performed on 20% of cases attended and the remaining 80% would have been seronegative.
RESULTS: There were 8044 serologies performed for 248 conditions not recommended by DC-SEMES-GESIDA, in 17 there were seropositive, and in 12 the performance of HIV serology would be efficient. The highest prevalence of detection corresponded to patients from endemic countries (7.41%, 0.91-24.3), lymphopenia (4.76%, 0.12-23.8), plateletopenia (4.37%, 1.20-10.9), adenopathy (3.45%, 0.42-11.9), meningoencephalitis (3.12%, 0.38-10.8) and drug use (2.50%, 0.68-6.28). Sensitivity analysis confirmed efficiency in 6 of them: endemic country origin, plateletopenia, drug abuse, toxic syndrome, behavioral-confusional disorder-agitation and fever of unknown origin.
CONCLUSIONS: The DC-SEMES-GESIDA targeted HIV screening strategy in the ED could efficiently include other circumstances not previously considered; the most cost-effective would be origin from an endemic country, plateletopenia, drug abuse, toxic syndrome, behavioral-confusional-agitation disorder and fever of unknown origin.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to establish appropriate quality standards for emergency departments (EDQS) in Palestine.
METHODS: The study comprised four phases. First, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to develop a framework for assessing healthcare services in EDs. Second, the initial set of EDQS was developed based on the review findings. Third, local experts provided feedback on the EDQS, suggesting additional standards, and giving recommendations. This feedback was analysed to create a preliminary set of EDQS. Finally, an expanded group of local emergency care experts evaluated the preliminary set, providing feedback on content and structure to contribute to the final set of EDQS.
RESULTS: We identified quality domains in EDs and categorised them into clinical and administrative pathways. The clinical pathway comprises 39 standards across 7 subdomains: triage, treatment, transportation, medication safety, patient flow and medical diagnostic services. Expert consensus was achieved on 87.5% of these standards. The administrative domain includes 64 consensus-based standards across 9 subdomains: documentation, information management systems, access-location, design, leadership, management, workforce staffing, training, equipment, supplies, capacity-resuscitation rooms, resources for a safe working environment, performance indicators and patient safety-infection prevention and control programmes.
CONCLUSIONS: This study employed a rigorous approach to identify QS for EDs in Palestine. The multiphase consensus process ensured the appropriateness of the developed EDQS. Inclusion of diverse perspectives enriched the content. Future studies will validate and refine the standards based on feedback. The EDQS has potential to enhance emergency care in Palestine and serve as a model for other regions facing similar challenges.

OBJECTIVE: To reach consensus on the definition and attributes of \'person-centred handover practices\' in emergency departments.
BACKGROUND: Handover practices between emergency care practitioners and healthcare professionals in emergency departments are important and should be conducted meticulously. Person-centred handover practices may enhance the delivery of person-centred care in emergency departments.
METHODS: A three-round online Delphi survey.
METHODS: Nine experts participated in a three round Delphi survey. The expert panel comprised experts from nine countries. Quantitative data were descriptively analysed, and qualitative data were thematically analysed. A consensus of 80% had to be reached before an attribute and definition could be accepted.
RESULTS: Experts reached a consensus of 79% in round one, 95% in round two and 95% in round three. A final set of six attributes were agreed upon and the final concept definition was formulated.
CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred handover practices have not been implemented in emergency departments. Yet, person-centred handover practices may enhance the delivery of person-centred care, which has multiple benefits for patients and healthcare practitioners.
UNASSIGNED: Person-centred care is not generally implemented in emergency departments. Person-centred handover practices can lead to person-centred care. Handover practices in emergency departments are a high-risk activity. Despite numerous calls to standardise and improve handover practices, they remain a problem. Developing a standardised definition could be a first step towards implementing person-centred handover practices in emergency departments.
UNASSIGNED: The study adhered to the relevant EQUATOR reporting guidelines: Guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES) checklist.
UNASSIGNED: Improve handover practices and patient care. Improve person-centred care in emergency departments.
UNASSIGNED: Emergency care practitioners and nurses experienced in handover practices and/or person-centred care, working in clinical and academic fields, participated in the study by sharing their expert knowledge during each of the Delphi rounds.

Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study.
A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors.
In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include.
Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Managing patient with suicidal thoughts and behaviours presents significant challenges due to the scarcity of robust evidence and clear guidance. This study sought to develop a comprehensive set of practical guidelines for the assessment and management of suicidal crises.
METHODS: Utilizing the Delphi methodology, 80 suicide clinician and research experts agreed on a series of recommendations. The process involved two iterative rounds of surveys to assess agreement with drafted recommendations, inviting panellists to comment and vote, culminating in 43 consensus recommendations approved with at least 67% agreement. These consensus recommendations fall into three main categories: clinical assessment, immediate care, and long-term approaches.
RESULTS: The panel formulated 43 recommendations spanning suicidal crisis recognition to continuous long-term care. These guidelines underscore systematic proactive suicide risk screening, in-depth medical and toxicological assessment, and suicide risk appraisal considering personal, clinical factors and collateral information from family. The immediate care directives emphasize a secure environment, continuous risk surveillance, collaborative decision-making, including potential hospitalization, sensible pharmacological management, safety planning, and lethal means restriction counselling. Every discharge should be accompanied by prompt follow-up care incorporating proactive case management and multi-modal approach involving crisis lines, brief contact, and psychotherapeutic and pharmacological interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: This study generated comprehensive guidelines addressing care for individuals in suicidal crises, covering pre- to post-discharge care. These practical recommendations can guide clinicians in managing patients with suicidal thoughts and behaviours, improve patient safety, and ultimately contribute to the prevention of future suicidal crises.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is an acute and serious allergic reaction. Little is known about physician adherence to anaphylaxis guidelines among patients across different age groups.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate real-world physician adherence to anaphylaxis guidelines among children, adults, and older adults in emergency departments.
METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients with anaphylaxis who presented to 2 emergency departments at 2 branches of the largest tertiary hospital in Taiwan, between 2001 and 2020. Patients who met the diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis were enrolled and grouped by age: children (<18 years), adults (18-64 years), and older adults (≥65 years).
RESULTS: We enrolled 771 patients with anaphylaxis (159 children, 498 adults, and 114 older adults). Intramuscular epinephrine was administered in 294 cases (38.1%). There was a significant age-group difference in the rate of intramuscular epinephrine administration (46.5% in children, 37.3% in adults, and 29.8% in older adults; P trend = .004). When stratified by severity, 14.3% of older adults with moderate reactions received intramuscular epinephrine, whereas 35.2% of adults and 55.3% of children received intramuscular epinephrine (P trend < .001), whereas such difference was not found in patients with severe reactions. Upon discharge from emergency departments, 15.3% received allergist referral (52.2% in children, 6.6% in adults, and 1.8% in older adults; P trend < .001); 12.5% received education on avoidance of triggers (18.9%, 11.4%, and 7.9%; P trend = .01), and 16.1% received education on alarm symptoms (21.4%, 15.1%, and 13.2%; P trend = .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The real-world physician adherence to anaphylaxis guidelines remains suboptimal in emergency departments, particularly among older adults. Physician continuing education is needed to improve the gap between anaphylaxis guidelines and clinical practice.