Effect of multifaceted interventions on reducing return visits within 72 h after non-traumatic emergency department visits

Predictors and outcomes of patients that return unplanned to the Emergency Department and require critical care admission: A multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence, characteristics (including timeframe) and predictors of patients discharged from the Emergency Department (ED) that later return and require admission.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional study examining all return visits to three EDs in Sydney, Australia, over a 12-month period. Patients returning within 28 days from ED discharge with the same or similar complaint were classified as a return visit to ensure capture of all return visits. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse the data and logistic regression was performed to predict factors associated with return visits with general admission, and return visits admitted to critical care.

RESULTS

There were 1,798 (30%) return visits which resulted in admission, mostly to a non-critical care area (1,679, 93%). The current NSW 48 -h time frame used to define a return visit in NSW captured half of all admitted returns (49.5%) and just over half (59.2%) of critical care admissions. Variables associated with an admission to critical care were age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01, 1.03), initial presentation (index visit) made to a lower level ED (OR 3.76 95% CI 2.06, 6.86), Triage Category 2 (OR 3.67 95% CI 2.04, 6.60) and a cardiac diagnosis (OR 5.76, 95% CI 3.01, 11.01). This model had adequate discriminant ability with AUROC = 0.825.

CONCLUSION

A small number of return visits result in admission, especially to critical care. These patients are at risk of poor outcomes. As such, clinicians should have increased index of suspicion for patients who return that are older, present with cardiac problems, or have previously presented to a lower level ED. Revision of the current timeframe that defines a return visit ought to be considered by policy makers to improve the accuracy of this widely used key performance indicator.

Qualitative evaluation of a mandatory provincial programme auditing emergency department return visits

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this qualitative study was to evaluate the perceived impact and value of the Return Visit Quality Programme (RVQP), a mandatory province-wide emergency department audit programme.

DESIGN

We employed an interpretive descriptive qualitative approach with maximum variation sampling to ensure diverse representation across several geographical and institutional factors. RVQP programme leads were invited to participate in semistructured interviews and snowball sampling was used to reach non-lead physicians to capture the perspectives of those working within the programme.

SETTING

In Ontario's RVQP, participating emergency departments must audit their return visits resulting in admission to identify issues that can be addressed through quality improvement initiatives.

PARTICIPANTS

Between June and August 2018, we interviewed 32 participants (local programme leads and non-lead physicians) from 23 out of the 86 participating centres.

RESULTS

Participants' perceived impact and value of the programme was associated with the existence (or absence) and nature of the local quality improvement culture, the implementation approach of the programme within their emergency departments, and key aspects of the programme pertaining to medicolegal concerns and resource availability.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of an innovative, large-scale programme aimed at promoting continuous quality improvement in emergency departments showed that while its perceived impact has been meaningful, there are key structural and operational elements that support and hinder this aim. Healthcare leaders should consider these findings when looking to implement large-scale audit or quality improvement programmes.

Improving Quality of Care Through a Mandatory Provincial Audit Program: Ontario's Emergency Department Return Visit Quality Program

The Emergency Department Return Visit Quality Program was launched in Ontario, Canada, to promote a culture of quality. It mandates the province's largest-volume emergency departments (EDs) to audit charts of patients who had a return visit leading to hospital admission, including some of their 72-hour all-cause return visits with admission and all of their 7-day ones with sentinel diagnoses (ie, acute myocardial infarction, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and pediatric sepsis), and submit their findings to a governmental agency. This provides an opportunity to identify possible adverse events and quality issues, which hospitals can then address through quality improvement initiatives. A group of emergency physicians with quality improvement expertise analyzed the submitted audits and accompanying narrative templates, using a general inductive approach to develop a novel classification of recurrent quality themes. Since the Return Visit Quality Program launched in 2016, 125,698 return visits with admission have been identified, representing 0.93% of the 86 participating EDs' 13,559,664 visits. Overall, participating hospitals have conducted 12,852 detailed chart audits, uncovering 3,010 (23.4%) adverse events/quality issues and undertaking hundreds of quality improvement provincewide projects as a result. The inductive analysis revealed 11 recurrent themes, classified into 3 groupings: patient characteristics (ie, patient risk profile and elder care), ED team actions or processes (ie, physician cognitive lapses, documentation, handover/communication between providers, radiology, vital signs, and high-risk medications or medication interactions), and health care system issues (ie, discharge planning/community follow-up, left against medical advice/left without being seen, and imaging/testing availability). The Return Visit Quality Program is the largest mandatory audit program for EDs and provides a novel approach to identify local adverse events/quality issues to target for improved patient safety and quality of care. It provides a blueprint for health system leaders to enable clinicians to develop an approach to organizational quality, as well as for teams to construct an audit system that yields defined issues amenable to improvement.

Awareness of diagnosis and follow up care after discharge from the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Patients currently receive discharge summaries including investigation results, medical assessment and follow up requirements with health professionals on discharge from the emergency department (ED). This study aimed to evaluate if a simplified discharge information card in addition to current care improved patients' awareness of their discharge diagnosis and requirements for follow-up appointment.

METHODS

A prospective pre-post design interventional study was conducted. The pre-intervention phase collected data from patients who did not receive the discharge card. The post-intervention phase occurred after implementing the discharge card. Participants underwent brief interviews to assess awareness of diagnosis and follow-up appointment requirements after discharge. Responses were compared to the plan in the medical notes and concordance determined.

RESULTS

There were 112 patients in the pre-intervention group and 117 in the post-intervention group. Awareness of discharge diagnosis improved from 73.2% (95% CI: 64.3-80.5) of pre-interventions participants to 89.7% (95% CI: 82.9-94.0) for participants receiving the discharge card (p<0.001; NNT 6.1 patients). Statistically significant improvements were observed regarding knowledge of follow-up destination and timing.

CONCLUSION

A short discharge information card improved awareness of discharge diagnoses and follow-up requirements. Such interventions that empower patients with knowledge about their health, should be considered prior to discharge from EDs.

Short Term Unscheduled Revisits to Paediatric Emergency Department - A Six Year Data

INTRODUCTION

Reviewing the reasons for return visits within 24 hours is a very important method of determining possible problems of emergency health care. Several causes stay behind unscheduled emergency return visits. Therefore, identifying these factors is crucial to set strategies in order to decrease the number of unnecessary visits.

AIM

To define the characteristics of the patients returning to the Paediatric Emergency Department (PED) within 24 hours via determining rate, number and demographic data of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study design involves retrospective data collection of patients who returned to PED within 24 hours after being discharged. Data was included over six year period and was collected from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2016. The data was analysed with SPSS17.0 statistical package for windows.

RESULTS

A total of 1994 patients returned to PED within 24 hours from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2016. The most common group of revisiting patients were toddlers (aged 0-2-year old), n=1168 (58.5%), and the least number represented young adolescents (aged 15-18-year old), n=82 (4.1%). Number of patients returning to PED in 24 hours has significantly increased within years from approximately 90 patients to 720 (p<0.05). This increase in number was observed in all and each age group (from 0-18 years of age) without any exception. Seasonal distribution of the patients showed no significant difference (p>0.05) for each age, but again, presented definite negative correlation with age (the older is the patient group, the less is the number of revisits). The most common time for revisits was 17-24 hours after first discharge from PED, n=1277 (64.04%).

CONCLUSION

The number of return visits is increasing over the years. The younger the patient is, more likely is the risk of unscheduled revisit to PED. Most of the patients returned to PED in 17 to 24 hours after discharge.