Absolutely not to defend what happened but that GAD diagnosis sets in motion the anchoring, because now you have an “established” (and recent) psychiatric diagnosis and it’s all too common that an ED is going to heavily prioritize this as a progression. EDs are just very bad in general about reconsidering a differential for a (new) chronic condition unless it’s flashing like a neon sign, especially when there is an easy enough dispo to reach for, transfer to psych in this case. But even worse, you already had an extensive outpatient workup to hang their hat on. From the history provided the history of a fall is the only thing mentioned that sounded like a slam dunk brewing neurological deficit, and it is not very specific, half the ED are people that fell. I’m sure you’ve read the MDM portion of the ED note, it may or may not give some idea of why neurological conditions were dismissed. Very unfortunate.

That is an interesting take that I hadn't thought of. Thank you for that perspective.

I actually haven't been able to get the ED notes from that first ER visit yet. They are in a different system than Brigham and Women's, which made it super easy to read notes in their app.