Patient Insurance Profiles: A Tertiary Care Compared to Three Freestanding Emergency Departments

Independent freestanding emergency departments and implications for the rural emergency physician workforce in Texas

OBJECTIVE

Independent freestanding emergency departments (IFEDs) have proliferated over the last decade, largely in Texas. We examined the IFED physician workforce composition and changes in emergency physician workforce supply across states and in rural Texas over the period of IFED proliferation following a 2009 legislation allowing the licensing of these sites.

DATA SOURCES

IFED websites, Texas Medical Board lookup tool, National Plan & Provider Enumeration System (NPPES), Provider Enrollment and Chain/Ownership System (PECOS), Medicare Physician Shared Patient Patterns, CareSet DocGraph Hop Teaming, Healthcare Provider Database.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive analysis of the IFED physician workforce; quasi-experimental difference-in-difference analysis of Texas emergency physician movement into and out of the state; and difference-in-difference-in-difference analysis of the change in emergency physician supply between rural and urban areas in Texas compared with other states.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

Using the NPIs obtained through Texas IFED websites and Texas Medical Board data, we examined NPPES/PECOS files, Medicare Physician Shared Patient Patterns, and CareSet DocGraph Hop Teaming for IFED physician practice locations from 2009 to 2017. We extracted all active emergency physicians from a Healthcare Provider Database, derived from a 5% Medicare claims (1999-2017).

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In 2019, 545 physicians practiced in Texas IFEDs, of which 515 (94.5%) were emergency physicians. We located 533 in previous practice, of whom 522 (97.9%) previously practiced in Disproportionate Share Hospitals and 100 (18.8%) in rural areas. Following legislation to begin licensing IFEDs in 2009, there were on average 42.1 (P < .01) moving into Texas and 17.0 (P < .01) fewer moving out compared with all other states. Our results also indicated that the difference in emergency physician supply between rural and urban Texas was 1,002 (P < .01) fewer than for other states.

CONCLUSIONS

New models of health care organizations such as IFEDs have workforce implications that may further exacerbate rural and underserved workforce and access challenges.

Estimates of throughput and utilization at freestanding compared to low-volume hospital-based emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

Our investigation compared throughput metrics and utilization measures for freestanding emergency departments (FSEDs) versus hospital-based emergency departments (HBEDs) of similar volumes in the United States.

METHODS

This study is a cross sectional survey of 183 FSEDs and 317 HBEDs located across the United States using the Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA) Database. We measured common emergency department (ED) throughput metrics. Primary outcomes included overall length of stay, length of stay for admitted, and length of stay for treated and released patients. Outcomes were weighted based on the proportion of ED volume per facility as per a prior pilot study. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to adjust for measured differences between FSEDs and HBEDs. The variables that were controlled for in regression analysis included geographic location of the ED (urban, suburban, and rural), percent of high acuity capacity, ED volume, percentage of patients arriving via emergency medical services (EMS), and percentage of pediatric patients.

RESULTS

Nationally, the median length of stay in minutes (104.2 vs 140.0), length of stay for treated and released patients (98.6 vs 122.9), door-to-bed (4.0 vs 8.0), door-to-doctor (11.0 vs 16.0), percentage of patients admitted through the ED (4.0 vs 11.0), and percentage of patients leaving the ED without being seen (LWBS) (0.9 vs 1.5), were significantly lower at FSEDs compared to HBEDs (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). Length of stay for admitted patients (265.9 vs 241.8) and median boarding time (96.8 vs. 71.3) were significantly lower in HBEDs compared to FSEDs. X-ray, computed tomography, and ECG utilization per 100 patients was significantly lower at the FSEDs compared to HBEDs. Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that the length of stay for treated and released patients was 8.67 minutes shorter for FSEDs as compared to HBEDs (95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.4 to -16.0). The length of stay for admitted patients was 44 minutes longer for FSEDs as compared to HBEDs (95% CI = 25.5 to 63.0).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of similarly sized EDs in the United States, throughput metrics for FSEDs tended to be significantly shorter from the arrival of the patient until their departure, except for patients requiring hospital admission. For measures favoring FSEDs, throughput times range from 20%-50% shorter than HBEDs.

Same provider, different location: Variation in patient satisfaction scores between freestanding and hospital-based emergency departments

BACKGROUND

Patient satisfaction scores have become quality benchmarks for hospitals, are publicly reported, and are often tied to financial incentives. We determined whether patient satisfaction scores for individual emergency medicine providers varied according to the clinical setting.

METHODS

We obtained patient satisfaction survey results from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018 for patients treated at 6 freestanding (FED) and 11 hospital-based emergency departments (HBED). Differences in mean score by ED facility were tested for significance. Mean score differences with 95% confidence intervals are presented. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to predict the odds of receiving different scores by type of ED facility and adjusted for patient and provider demographics and ED length of stay.

RESULTS

Sixty-six providers with 3743 total surveys were analyzed: FED (n = 1974) and HBED (n = 1769). Overall satisfaction scores were higher for FED compared to HBED surveys 1.13 [95% CI, 1.0-1.3]. In multivariable logistic regression, we found patients seen at the FEDs were 42% more likely to rate providers courtesy as "very good" compared to patients seen at a HBED [OR: 1.42, 95% CI (0.94-2.15)]. Similarly, patients from FEDs showed increased likelihood to rate providers as "very good" for keeping patients informed about treatment [OR: 1.70, 95% CI (1.21-2.39)], took time to listen to patients [OR: 1.66, 95% CI (0.72-1.60)] and concerned for patient's comfort [OR: 1.54, 95% CI (1.12-2.12)].

CONCLUSION

Individual providers, who practice at both types of facilities, consistently received higher satisfaction ratings from patients at FEDs compared to HBEDs.

Clinical differences between visits to adult freestanding and hospital-based emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

Compare clinical characteristics for adult visits to freestanding emergency departments (FEDs) and a hospital-based ED (HBED).

METHODS

Electronic health records were collected on adult ED visits from 7/1/14 to 6/30/15 from three FEDs and one level 1 trauma tertiary care HBED.

RESULTS

There were 55,909 HBED visits; 44,108 FED visits. The FED population was slightly more female (61% vs 57%), younger (48 vs 46 years), white (86% vs 60%), and employed (67% vs 49%). A higher percent of FED visits had private insurance (43% vs 20%); a lower percent had Medicaid (25% vs 42%) and Medicare (23% vs 30%). The top three presenting problems were the same at the HBED and FEDs, but the order differed: gastrointestinal (HBED 19% vs FED 18%), cardiorespiratory (18% vs 16%), injury-pain-swelling of extremity (14% vs 17%). Differences were seen in primary ICD9 codes. One quarter of FED visits and only 18% of HBED visits were for injury/poisoning. A higher percent of FED visits were for respiratory diseases (12% vs 9%) but a lower percent were for circulatory system diseases (7% vs 11%) and visits for mental illness (2% vs 6%). Nearly 30% of HBED visits resulted in admission, compared to 8% of FED visits. ESI level differed significantly, with a lower percent of high acuity cases at FEDs (level 1: 0.1% vs 1.6%; level 2: 5% vs 26%).

CONCLUSION

Differences were observed in clinical characteristics of adult HBED visits versus FEDs. Results of this study can help communities plan their emergency care system.

Variation in hospital admission rates between a tertiary care and two freestanding emergency departments

BACKGROUND

Recently, freestanding emergency departments (FSEDs) have grown significantly in number. Critics have expressed concern that FSEDs may increase healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVE

We determined whether admission rates for identical diagnoses varied among the same group of physicians according to clinical setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective comparison of adult admission rates (n=3230) for chest pain, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, and congestive heart failure (CHF) between a hospital-based ED (HBED) and two FSEDs throughout 2015. Frequency distribution and proportions were reported for categorical variables stratified by facility type. For categories with cell frequency less or equal to 5, Fisher's Exact test was used to calculate a P value. Chi square tests were used to assess difference in proportions of potential predictor variables between the HBED and FSEDs. For continuous variables, the mean was reported and Student's t-test assessed the difference in means between HBED and FSED patients. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted prevalence odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) for patient disposition outcomes associated with type of ED facility visited.

RESULTS

Of 3230 patients, 53% used the HBED and 47% used the FSED. Patients visiting the HBED and FSED varied significantly in gender, acuity levels, diagnosis, and number of visits. Age was not significantly different between facilities. Multivariable adjusted estimated prevalence odds ratio for patients admitted were 1.2 [95%CI: 1.0-1.4] in the HBED facility compared to patients using FSEDs.

CONCLUSION

In our healthcare system, FSEDs showed a trend towards a 20% lower admission rate for chest pain, COPD, asthma and CHF.