Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33334364›Full record

ReviewScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2020

A conceptual framework for Emergency department design in a pandemic.

Gayathri Devi Nadarajan, Eunizar Omar, Benjamin S Abella, Pei Shan Hoe, Sang Do Shin, Matthew Huei-Ming Ma, Marcus Eng Hock Ong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Patients with Musculoskeletal Disorders Presenting to the Emergency Department: The COVID-19 Lesson.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gayathri Devi NadarajanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, 1 Outram Road, Singapore City, 169608, Singapore. gayathri.devi.nadarajan@singhealth.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8811-7374
Eunizar OmarDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Sengkang General Hospital, Sengkang, Singapore.
Benjamin S AbellaCenter for Resuscitation Science and Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
Pei Shan HoeDuke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore City, Singapore.
Sang Do ShinDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Matthew Huei-Ming MaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Marcus Eng Hock OngDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, 1 Outram Road, Singapore City, 169608, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current COVID-19 pandemic is highlighting gaps around the world in the design and workflow of Emergency Departments (ED). These gaps have an impact on both patient care and staff safety and represent a risk to public health. There is a need for a conceptual framework to guide ED design and workflow to address these challenges. Such a framework is important as the ED environment will always remain vulnerable to infectious diseases outbreaks in the future.

aimsThis paper aims to address issues and principles around ED design and workflow amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose a conceptual framework and checklist for EDs to be prepared for future outbreaks as well.

methodsA scoping literature review was conducted, of the experiences of EDs in managing outbreaks such as SARS, H1N1 and COVID-19. The combined experiences of the authors and the experiences from the literature were grouped under common themes to develop the conceptual framework.

resultsFour key principles were derived- (1) situational awareness, surveillance and perimeter defence, (2) ED staff protection, (3) surge capacity management and (4) ED recovery. The findings were integrated in a proposed conceptual framework to guide ED design in response to an infectious disease outbreak. There are various elements which need to be considered at ED input, throughput and output. These elements can be categorised into (1) system (workflow, protocols and communication), (2) staff (human resources), (3) space (infrastructure), and (4) supply (logistics) and are placed in a checklist for pragmatic use.

conclusionThe ED needs to be in a constant state of preparedness. A framework can be useful to guide ED design and workflow to achieve this. As all ED systems are different with varying capabilities, our framework may help EDs across the world prepare for infectious disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

SARS-CoV-2COVID-19Emergency Service, HospitalHumansPandemicsPublic HealthCOVID-19Emergency departmentFrameworkOperationPandemicSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33334364
PMCPMC7745175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.