The trend of voluminous, exhaustive discharge instructions puts the pressure on patients to understand and identify complex risk factors, like infection. According to the research, this is probably a bad idea.

One of the trickiest diagnoses in emergency medicine is pulmonary embolism. The problem is not a lack of information; the amount of literature on this topic is truly staggering. The problem with making the PE diagnosis is that ordering the definitive test, a CT pulmonary angiogram, is a big deal.

It gets a little tiring, and certainly frustrating, to be on the receiving end of recurring mandates from “the experts” regarding the care provide by physicians and nurses. It seems that CMS and its watch dog, the Joint Commission (JC), relish adding more and more requirements onto healthcare staff because, obviously, we just don’t seem to understand the importance of initiating these behaviors on our own.

WARNING:  If you are a radiologist, married to a radiologist, related to a radiologist, or even remotely like radiologists, you will be offended by this article. Be forewarned.

I think that I have made my view of electronic health records very clear to anyone who’s cared to listen. I think they are great for monitoring the movement of patients in larger EDs (electronic tracking boards). I have concerns that CPOE (computerized provider order entry) through the use of order sets has the potential to result in over-ordering (and will result in higher bills, unnecessary tests and less thought by providers).

In a follow-up to January’s analysis of COCPR, Rick Bukata, MD, reviews a new round of
abstracts and answers the question: Is compression-only CPR data too good to be true?

With every indicator pointing towards a looming physician shortage and increased medical demand, there’s really only one thing for emergency physicians to do . . .