Unscheduled return visits (URV) in adults to the emergency department (ED): a rapid evidence assessment policy review

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who return to the emergency department: a multicentre observational study by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network (CCEDRRN)

OBJECTIVE

Unplanned return emergency department (ED) visits can reflect clinical deterioration or unmet need from the original visit. We determined the characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who return to the ED for COVID-19-related revisits.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used data for all adult patients visiting 47 Canadian EDs with COVID-19 between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2022. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the characteristics associated with having a no return visit (SV=single visit group) versus at least one return visit (MV=return visit group) after being discharged alive at the first ED visit.

RESULTS

39 809 patients with COVID-19 had 44 862 COVID-19-related ED visits: 35 468 patients (89%) had one visit (SV group) and 4341 (11%) returned to the ED (MV group) within 30 days (mean 2.2, SD=0.5 ED visit). 40% of SV patients and 16% of MV patients were admitted at their first visit, and 41% of MV patients not admitted at their first ED visit were admitted on their second visit. In the MV group, the median time to return was 4 days, 49% returned within 72 hours. In multivariable modelling, a repeat visit was associated with a variety of factors including older age (OR=1.25 per 10 years, 95% CI (1.22 to 1.28)), pregnancy (1.86 (1.46 to 2.36)) and presence of comorbidities (eg, 1.72 (1.40 to 2.10) for cancer, 2.01 (1.52 to 2.66) for obesity, 2.18 (1.42 to 3.36) for organ transplant), current/prior substance use, higher temperature or WHO severe disease (1.41 (1.29 to 1.54)). Return was less likely for females (0.82 (0.77 to 0.88)) and those boosted or fully vaccinated (0.48 (0.34 to 0.70)).

CONCLUSIONS

Return ED visits by patients with COVID-19 within 30 days were common during the first two pandemic years and were associated with multiple factors, many of which reflect known risk for worse outcomes. Future studies should assess reasons for revisit and opportunities to improve ED care and reduce resource use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04702945.

Frequencies and reasons for unplanned emergency department return visits by older adults: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

As unplanned Emergency Department (ED) return visits (URVs) are associated with adverse health outcomes in older adults, many EDs have initiated post-discharge interventions to reduce URVs. Unfortunately, most interventions fail to reduce URVs, including telephone follow-up after ED discharge, investigated in a recent trial. To understand why these interventions were not effective, we analyzed patient and ED visit characteristics and reasons for URVs within 30 days for patients aged ≥ 70 years.

METHODS

Data was used from a randomized controlled trial, investigating whether telephone follow-up after ED discharge reduced URVs compared to a satisfaction survey call. Only observational data from control group patients were used. Patient and index ED visit characteristics were compared between patients with and without URVs. Two independent researchers determined the reasons for URVs and categorized them into: patient-related, illness-related, new complaints and other reasons. Associations were examined between the number of URVs per patient and the categories of reasons for URVs.

RESULTS

Of the 1659 patients, 222 (13.4%) had at least one URV within 30 days. Male sex, ED visit in the 30 days before the index ED visit, triage category "urgent", longer length of ED stay, urinary tract problems, and dyspnea were associated with URVs. Of the 222 patients with an URV, 31 (14%) returned for patient-related reasons, 95 (43%) for illness-related reasons, 76 (34%) for a new complaint and 20 (9%) for other reasons. URVs of patients who returned ≥ 3 times were mostly illness-related (72%).

CONCLUSION

As the majority of patients had an URV for illness-related reasons or new complaints, these data fuel the discussion as to whether URVs can or should be prevented.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

For this cohort study, we used data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT). This trial was pre-registered in the Netherlands Trial Register with number NTR6815 on the 7^th of November 2017.

Return Rates for Opioid versus Nonopioid Management of Patients with Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Research suggests that opioid treatment for abdominal pain, which comprises a large proportion of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), may contribute to long-term opioid use without significant benefits with regard to symptom management.

OBJECTIVES

This study seeks to assess the association between opioid use for management of abdominal pain in the ED and return ED visits for abdominal pain within 30 days for patients discharged from the ED at initial presentation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicenter observational study of adult patients presenting to and discharged from 21 EDs with a chief concern of abdominal pain between November 2018 and April 2020. The proportion of 30-day return visits to the ED for patients who received opioid analgesics was compared with a reference group of patients who only received acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or both.

RESULTS

Of the 4745 patients, 1304 (27.5%) received opioids and 1101 (23.2%) only received either acetaminophen, NSAIDs, or both. Among those given opioids, 287 (22.0%) returned to the ED for abdominal pain within 30 days, compared with 162 (14.7%) of those in the reference group (odds ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.27-1.95, p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients given opioids for abdominal pain in the ED had 57% increased odds of a return ED visit within 30 days compared with those given only acetaminophen or NSAIDs. This warrants further research on the use of nonopioid analgesics in the ED, especially in patients with anticipated discharge.

Upstreamist leaders: how risk factors for unscheduled return visits (URV) to the emergency department can inform integrated healthcare

PURPOSE

This paper aims to report on research undertaken in an National Health Service (NHS) emergency department in the north of England, UK, to identify which patients, with which clinical conditions are returning to the emergency department with an unscheduled return visit (URV) within seven days. This paper analyses the data in relation to the newly introduced Integrated Care Boards (ICBs). The continued upward increase in demand for emergency care services requires a new type of "upstreamist", health system leader from the emergency department, who can report on URV data to influence the development of integrated care services to reduce further demand on the emergency department.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Patients were identified through the emergency department symphony data base and included patients with at least one return visit to emergency department (ED) within seven days. A sample of 1,000 index visits between 1 January 2019-31 October 2019 was chosen by simple random sampling technique through Excel. Out of 1,000, only 761 entries had complete data in all variables. A statistical analysis was undertaken using Poisson regression using NCSS statistical software. A review of the literature on integrated health care and its relationship with health systems leadership was undertaken to conceptualise a new type of "upstreamist" system leadership to advance the integration of health care.

FINDINGS

Out of all 83 variables regressed with statistical analysis, only 12 variables were statistically significant on multi-variable regression. The most statistically important factor were patients presenting with gynaecological disorders, whose relative rate ratio (RR) for early-URV was 43% holding the other variables constant. Eye problems were also statistically highly significant (RR = 41%) however, clinically both accounted for just 1% and 2% of the URV, respectively. The URV data combined with "upstreamist" system leadership from the ED is required as a critical mechanism to identify gaps and inform a rationale for integrated care models to lessen further demand on emergency services in the ED.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

At a time of significant pressure for emergency departments, there needs to be a move towards more collaborative health system leadership with support from statistical analyses of the URV rate, which will continue to provide critical information to influence the development of integrated health and care services. This study identifies areas for further research, particularly for mixed methods studies to ascertain why patients with specific complaints return to the emergency department and if alternative pathways could be developed. The success of the Esther model in Sweden gives hope that patient-centred service development could create meaningful integrated health and care services.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

This research was a large-scale quantitative study drawing upon data from one hospital in the UK to identify risk factors for URV. This quality metric can generate important data to inform the development of integrated health and care services. Further research is required to review URV data for the whole of the NHS and with the new Integrated Health and Care Boards, there is a new impetus to push for this metric to provide robust data to prioritise the need to develop integrated services where there are gaps.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first large-scale study of its kind to generate whole hospital data on risk factors for URVs to the emergency department. The URV is an important global quality metric and will continue to generate important data on those patients with specific complaints who return back to the emergency department. This is a critical time for the NHS and at the same time an important opportunity to develop "Esther" patient-centred approaches in the design of integrated health and care services.

High-risk Return Visits to United States Emergency Departments, 2010–2018

Introduction: Although factors related to a return visit to the emergency department (ED) have been reported, only a few studies have examined “high-risk” ED revisits with serious adverse outcomes. In this study we aimed to describe the incidence and trend of high-risk ED revisits in United States EDs and to investigate factors associated with these revisits. Methods: We obtained data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), 2010–2018. Adult ED revisits within 72 hours of a previous discharge were identified using a mark on the patient record form. We defined high-risk revisits as revisits with serious adverse outcomes, including intensive care unit admissions, emergency surgery, cardiac catheterization, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during the return visit. We performed analyses using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression, accounting for NHAMCS’s complex survey design. Results: Over the nine-year study period, there were an estimated 37,700,000 revisits, and the proportion of revisits in the entire ED population decreased slightly from 5.1% in 2010 to 4.5% in 2018 (P for trend = 0.02). By contrast, there were an estimated 827,000 high-risk ED revisits, and the proportion of high-risk revisits in the entire ED population remained stable at approximately 0.1%. The mean age of these high-risk revisit patients was 57 years, and 43% were men. Approximately 6% of the patients were intubated, and 13% received CPR. Most of them were hospitalized, and 2% died in the ED. Multivariable analysis showed that older age (65+ years), Hispanic ethnicity, daytime visits, and arrival by ambulance during the revisit were independent predictors of high-risk revisits. Conclusion: High-risk revisits accounted for a relatively small fraction (0.1%) of ED visits. Over the period of the NHAMCS survey between 2010-2018, this fraction remained stable. We identified factors during the return visit that could be used to label high-risk revisits for timely intervention.

Patterns in emergency department unscheduled return visits during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

Fear surrounding nosocomial infections, expanded telehealth, and decreases in ED (emergency department) utilization altered the way patients sought emergency care during the COVID pandemic. This study aims to evaluate COVID-19's impact on the frequency and characteristics of unscheduled return visits (URVs) to the adult and pediatric ED.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, the electronic medical record was used to identify ≤9-day URVs at a tertiary adult and pediatric ED from 4/16/19–2/29/20 (control) and 4/16/20–2/28/21 (COVID). The primary outcome, proportion of total ED visits made up by URVs, and secondary outcomes, patient characteristics (age), illness acuity (emergency severity index (ESI)), disposition, and mortality were compared between the cohorts. Pediatric and adult data were analyzed separately. A sub-analysis was performed to exclude patients with suspected respiratory infections.

Results

For adults, n = 4265, there was no significant difference between the proportion of ED census made up by URVs (4.56% (control) vs 4.76% (COVID), p = 0.17), mean patient age (46.33 (control) vs 46.18 (COVID), p = 0.80), ESI acuity (2.95 (control) vs 2.95 (COVID), p = 0.83), disposition (admission 0.32% (control) vs 0.39% (COVID), p = 0.69), and mortality (0.23% (control) and 0.49% (COVID), p = 0.15). When excluding possible respiratory infections comparisons remained insignificant.

For pediatrics, n = 1214, there was a significant difference in the proportion of ED census made up by URVs (4.83% (control) to 3.55% (COVID), p < 0.01), age (5.52 (control) vs 6.43 (COVID), p = 0.01), and ESI acuity (3.31 (control) vs 3.17 (COVID), p < 0.01). There was no difference in disposition (admission 0.12% (control) vs 0% (COVID), p = 1). When excluding possible respiratory infections acuity (p = 0.03) remained significant.

Conclusion

In the adult population, COVID did not significantly alter any of our outcomes. For pediatric patients, a decrease in the proportion of URVs and increase in acuity during COVID suggests that patients may have had other means of accessing care, avoided the ED, received more adequate care at initial presentation, or represented when more acutely ill.

Characteristics of an Unscheduled Emergency Department Revisit Within 72 hours of Discharge

Background

An unscheduled emergency department (ED) revisit is defined as a patient presenting to the ED with the same problem within 72 hours of discharge. The revisits result in overcrowding and compromise the care provided by the ED. We assume that the poor quality of care provided by the ED is the reason for revisiting. However, the circumstances surrounding these revisits are not well-understood. We conducted this study to understand the characteristics associated with the revisits.

Objectives

We aimed to identify the common causes of ED revisits within 72 hours of discharge and determine the outcome of these patients during the revisit.

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study at a tertiary care center from July 2015 to June 2017, including patients presenting at the ED within 72 hours after their first visit. Our study selected 50 patients using a simple random sampling method and identified the leading causes of revisit as doctor-related, patient-related, and illness-related.

Results

We found that 56% (28/50) of patients returned to the ED for illness-related reasons, 26% (13/50) for doctor-related reasons, and 18% (9/50) for patient-related reasons. In addition, we found that 62% (31/50) of patients who returned to the ED within 72 hours required in-patient admission.

Conclusion

The most common cause of ED revisit was illness-related causes, and more than half of the patients during a revisit required in-patient admission. The modifiable causes of the ED revisit, such as doctor-related and patient-related factors, were discovered in this study. These findings may aid in reducing ED revisits and improving the ED quality.

Clinician perspectives on reasons for, implications and management of unplanned patient returns to the Emergency Department: A descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Unplanned return visits to the emergency department (ED) have been associated with adverse outcomes and may reflect the quality of care delivered. Several studies speculate the reasons for return and suggest clinician behaviour as potentially influencing a patient's decision to return to the ED. There is little research about this issue from the clinician's perspective, which is necessary to inform future practice improvement.

METHODS

A descriptive cross sectional design was employed to ascertain perspectives on identification and management of return visits occurring within 48 hours of discharge. An electronic survey was distributed to all medical, nursing, and clerical staff at one ED. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data and content analysis was performed on textual data. Results were categorised as barriers or facilitators, then mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework.

RESULTS

A response rate of 59.7% (n=86/144) was achieved. Staff reported increased levels of concern for this patient group but not all staff were aware of the policy for managing return patients (40.7%). Five barriers and three facilitators were identified that mapped to eight influencers of behaviour including knowledge, memory and environmental factors.

CONCLUSION

Overall, staff were aware of return patients but lacked familiarity with policy and processes to identify and commence relevant protocols. Further review of current practice as well as the patient perspective is required before any intervention to improve practice is developed.

Telephone follow-up to reduce unplanned hospital returns for older emergency department patients: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Telephone follow-up calls could optimize the transition from the emergency department (ED) to home for older patients. However, the effects on hospital return rates are not clear. We investigated whether telephone follow-up reduces unplanned hospitalizations and/or unplanned ED return visits within 30 days of ED discharge.

DESIGN

Pragmatic randomized controlled trial with allocation by month; odd months intervention group, even months control group.

SETTING

Two ED locations of a non-academic teaching hospital in The Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Community-dwelling adults aged ≥70 years, discharged home from the ED were randomized to the intervention group (N = 4732) or control group (N = 5104).

INTERVENTION

Intervention group patients: semi-scripted telephone call from an ED nurse within 24 h after discharge to identify post-discharge problems and review discharge instructions. Control group patients: scripted satisfaction survey telephone call.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome: total number of unplanned hospitalizations and/or ED return visits within 30 days of ED discharge.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

separate numbers of unplanned hospitalizations and ED return visits. Subgroup analysis by age, sex, living condition, and degree of crowding in the ED at discharge.

RESULTS

Overall, 42% were males, and median age was 78 years. In the intervention group, 1516 of 4732 patients (32%) consented, and in the control group 1659 of 5104 (33%) patients. Unplanned 30-day hospitalization and/or ED return visit was found in 16% of intervention group patients and 14% of control group patients (odds ratio 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.96-1.42). Also, no statistically significant differences were found in secondary outcome measures. Within the subgroups, the intervention did not have beneficial effects for the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

Telephone follow-up after ED discharge in older patients did not result in reduction of unplanned hospital admissions and/or ED return visits within 30 days. These results raise the question of whether other outcomes could be improved by post-discharge ED telephone follow-up.

90-Day Return Visit to the Emergency Department After an Initial Neurosurgical Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated emergency department (ED) neurosurgical reevaluation rates and their causes. Identifying the most significant reasons that make patients return to the ED for a neurosurgical reevaluation can help implement changes to reduce the economic and medical burden of patient turnover.

METHODS

All patients undergoing neurosurgical reevaluation at our institution's ED after an initial neurosurgical evaluation were enrolled in a prospective 3-month longitudinal registry. Inclusion criteria were all adult patients 21 years of age or older previously evaluated by neurosurgery at our institution's ED who return within 90 days for a neurosurgical reevaluation.

RESULTS

We found an overall 90-day ED neurosurgical return visit rate of 2.1%. During the study, 34 patients returned to the ED for a neurosurgical reevaluation. Patients returned for a neurosurgical reevaluation at a median of 23.5 days after the initial neurosurgery evaluation. The principal causes for a return visit were altered mental status, headache, and wound infections. Among the returning patients, 59% required hospitalization and 50% required an operation.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to prospectively collect data to estimate the 90-day ED return visit rate for a neurosurgical reevaluation following an initial ED neurosurgical evaluation. Some patients still use the ED to get continued care of their condition despite having access to their primary care physician. Better communication, social worker coordination, and prompt follow-up appointments at the neurosurgical outpatient clinic may reduce return visits.

Occupational Therapy in the Emergency Department: Patient Frailty and Unscheduled Return Visits

Background. Occupational therapy facilitates care for complex frail emergency department (ED) patients who may have unscheduled return visits (URVs). Purpose. To determine the prevalence of frailty amongst ED patients referred to occupational therapy and if frailty affected the rates and reasons for URVs. Methods. A mixed-methods health records review was conducted of older adults referred to an ED-based occupational therapy program. Findings. Most patients were frail (60.6%). 31.0% of patients discharged home had a URV within 30 days, with no difference in URV rates between frail and non-frail populations. Providing occupational therapy education reduced the frequency of URVs. Frail patients had complex reasons for their URVs, including functional, social/environmental, safety concerns, and/or "failure to thrive". Occupational therapy ED patients were typically vulnerable to moderately frail, dependent in some activities of daily living, and complex. Implications. ED-based occupational therapists must be aware of their patient's frailty and risk of URVs.

Factors associated with a high-risk return visit to the emergency department: a case-crossover study

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE

Although factors related to a return emergency department (ED) visit have been reported, few studies have examined 'high-risk' return ED visits with serious adverse outcomes. Understanding factors associated with high-risk return ED visits may help with early recognition and prevention of these catastrophic events.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to (1) estimate the incidence of high-risk return ED visits, and (2) to investigate time-varying factors associated with these revisits.

DESIGN

Case-crossover study.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

We used electronic clinical warehouse data from a tertiary medical center. We retrieved data from 651 815 ED visits over a 6-year period. Patient demographics and computerized triage information were extracted.

OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSIS

A high-risk return ED visit was defined as a revisit within 72 h of the index visit with ICU admission, receiving emergency surgery, or with in-hospital cardiac arrest during the return ED visit. Time-varying factors associated with a return visit were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 440 281 adult index visits, of which 19 675 (4.5%) return visits occurred within 72 h. Of them, 417 (0.1%) were high-risk revisits. Multivariable analysis showed that time-varying factors associated with an increased risk of high-risk revisits included the following: arrival by ambulance, dyspnea, or chest pain on ED presentation, triage level 1 or 2, acute change in levels of consciousness, tachycardia (>90/min), and high fever (>39°C).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a relatively small fraction of discharges (0.1%) developed serious adverse events during the return ED visits. We identified symptom-based and vital sign-based warning signs that may be used for patient self-monitoring at home, as well as new-onset signs during the return visit to alert healthcare providers for timely management of these high-risk revisits.

Inpatient Outcomes Following a Return Visit to the Emergency Department: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Introduction

Emergency department (ED) revisits are traditionally used to measure potential lapses in emergency care. However, recent studies on in-hospital outcomes following ED revisits have begun to challenge this notion. We aimed to examine inpatient outcomes and resource use among patients who were hospitalized following a return visit to the ED using a national database.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. One-third of ED visits from 2012–2013 were randomly selected and their subsequent hospitalizations included. We analyzed the inpatient outcomes (mortality and intensive care unit [ICU] admission) and resource use (length of stay [LOS] and costs). Comparisons were made between patients who were hospitalized after a return visit to the ED and those who were hospitalized during the index ED visit.

Results

Of the 3,019,416 index ED visits, 477,326 patients (16%) were directly admitted to the hospital. Among the 2,504,972 patients who were discharged during the index ED visit, 229,059 (9.1%) returned to the ED within three days. Of them, 37,118 (16%) were hospitalized. In multivariable analyses, the inpatient mortality rates and hospital LOS were similar between the two groups. Compared with the direct-admission group, the return-admission group had a lower ICU admission rate (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72–0.84), and lower costs (adjusted difference, −5,198 New Taiwan dollars, 95% CI, −6,224 to −4,172).

Conclusion

Patients who were hospitalized after a return visit to the ED had a lower ICU admission rate and lower costs, compared to those who were directly admitted. Our findings suggest that ED revisits do not necessarily translate to poor initial care and that subsequent inpatient outcomes should also be considered for better assessment.

Predicting Unscheduled Emergency Department Return Visits Among Older Adults: Population-Based Retrospective Study

Background

Unscheduled emergency department return visits (EDRVs) are key indicators for monitoring the quality of emergency medical care. A high return rate implies that the medical services provided by the emergency department (ED) failed to achieve the expected results of accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. Older adults are more susceptible to diseases and comorbidities than younger adults, and they exhibit unique and complex clinical characteristics that increase the difficulty of clinical diagnosis and treatment. Older adults also use more emergency medical resources than people in other age groups. Many studies have reviewed the causes of EDRVs among general ED patients; however, few have focused on older adults, although this is the age group with the highest rate of EDRVs.

Objective

This aim of this study is to establish a model for predicting unscheduled EDRVs within a 72-hour period among patients aged 65 years and older. In addition, we aim to investigate the effects of the influencing factors on their unscheduled EDRVs.

Methods

We used stratified and randomized data from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database and applied data mining techniques to construct a prediction model consisting of patient, disease, hospital, and physician characteristics. Records of ED visits by patients aged 65 years and older from 1996 to 2010 in the National Health Insurance Research Database were selected, and the final sample size was 49,252 records.

Results

The decision tree of the prediction model achieved an acceptable overall accuracy of 76.80%. Economic status, chronic illness, and length of stay in the ED were the top three variables influencing unscheduled EDRVs. Those who stayed in the ED overnight or longer on their first visit were less likely to return. This study confirms the results of prior studies, which found that economically underprivileged older adults with chronic illness and comorbidities were more likely to return to the ED.

Conclusions

Medical institutions can use our prediction model as a reference to improve medical management and clinical services by understanding the reasons for 72-hour unscheduled EDRVs in older adult patients. A possible solution is to create mechanisms that incorporate our prediction model and develop a support system with customized medical education for older patients and their family members before discharge. Meanwhile, a reasonably longer length of stay in the ED may help evaluate treatments and guide prognosis for older adult patients, and it may further reduce the rate of their unscheduled EDRVs.

A patient decision aid for prescribing pain medication: Results from a pilot test in two emergency departments

OBJECTIVE

This study piloted a patient education and decision aid tool about prescription pain relievers to determine potential impact on: comfort receiving an opioid prescription; knowledge about opioids; decisional conflict about whether to take an opioid; and shared decision making with the prescribing physician.

METHODS

Patients with acute pain were recruited from two emergency departments (ED), and randomized to complete the tool (N = 65) or a time-matched control (N = 59) on a tablet. Data collection involved: a baseline survey; a post-test immediately following the assigned program; a discharge survey after seeing the physician; and a 6-week follow-up survey.

RESULTS

Knowledge increased and comfort receiving an opioid decreased as hypothesized, but did not reach statistical significance. Despite the lack of knowledge differences, the tool had significant positive impact on patients feeling more informed and experiencing less decisional conflict. Shared decision making with the prescribing physician was not impacted.

CONCLUSION

A patient decision aid can help ED patients feel more informed and less conflicted about prescription pain relievers but did not impact shared decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patient education programs implemented in the ED should consider engaging physicians in the program to help to promote patient-centered approaches in the treatment of acute pain.

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.

In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit after a Return Visit to the Emergency Department

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) admission following a short-term emergency department (ED) revisit has been considered a particularly undesirable outcome among return-visit patients, although their in-hospital prognosis has not been discussed. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between adult patients admitted to the ICU after unscheduled ED revisits and those admitted during index ED visits. Method: This retrospective study was conducted at two tertiary medical centers in Taiwan from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2017. All adult non-trauma patients admitted to the ICU directly via the ED during the study period were included and divided into two comparison groups: patients admitted to the ICU during index ED visits and those admitted to the ICU during return ED visits. The outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation (MV) support, profound shock, hospital length of stay (HLOS), and total medical cost. Results: Altogether, 12,075 patients with a mean (standard deviation) age of 64.6 (15.7) years were included. Among these, 5.3% were admitted to the ICU following a return ED visit within 14 days and 3.1% were admitted following a return ED visit within 7 days. After adjusting for confounding factors for multivariate regression analysis, ICU admission following an ED revisit within 14 days was not associated with an increased mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89 to 1.32), MV support (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.26), profound shock (aOR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.18), prolonged HLOS (difference: 0.04 days, 95% CI: −1.02 to 1.09), and increased total medical cost (difference: USD 361, 95% CI: −303 to 1025). Similar results were observed after the regression analysis in patients that had a 7-day return visit. Conclusion: ICU admission following a return ED visit was not associated with major in-hospital outcomes including mortality, MV support, shock, increased HLOS, or medical cost. Although ICU admissions following ED revisits are considered serious adverse events, they may not indicate poor prognosis in ED practice.

A Value-Based Comparison of the Management of Ambulatory Respiratory Diseases in Walk-in Clinics, Primary Care Practices, and Emergency Departments: Protocol for a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In Canada, 30%-60% of patients presenting to emergency departments are ambulatory. This category has been labeled as a source of emergency department overuse. Acting on the presumption that primary care practices and walk-in clinics offer equivalent care at a lower cost, governments have invested massively in improving access to these alternative settings in the hope that patients would present there instead when possible, thereby reducing the load on emergency departments. Data in support of this approach remain scarce and equivocal.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the value of care received in emergency departments, walk-in clinics, and primary care practices by ambulatory patients with upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, otitis media, tonsillitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis, influenza-like illness, pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

METHODS

A multicenter prospective cohort study will be performed in Ontario and Québec. In phase 1, a time-driven activity-based costing method will be applied at each of the 15 study sites. This method uses time as a cost driver to allocate direct costs (eg, medication), consumable expenditures (eg, needles), overhead costs (eg, building maintenance), and physician charges to patient care. Thus, the cost of a care episode will be proportional to the time spent receiving the care. At the end of this phase, a list of care process costs will be generated and used to calculate the cost of each consultation during phase 2, in which a prospective cohort of patients will be monitored to compare the care received in each setting. Patients aged 18 years and older, ambulatory throughout the care episode, and discharged to home with one of the aforementioned targeted diagnoses will be considered. The estimated sample size is 1485 patients. The 3 types of care settings will be compared on the basis of primary outcomes in terms of the proportion of return visits to any site 3 and 7 days after the initial visit and the mean cost of care. The secondary outcomes measured will include scores on patient-reported outcome and experience measures and mean costs borne wholly by patients. We will use multilevel generalized linear models to compare the care settings and an overlap weights approach to adjust for confounding factors related to age, sex, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, registration with a family physician, socioeconomic status, and severity of illness.

RESULTS

Phase 1 will begin in 2021 and phase 2, in 2023. The results will be available in 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

The end point of our program will be for deciders, patients, and care providers to be able to determine the most appropriate care setting for the management of ambulatory emergency respiratory conditions, based on the quality and cost of care associated with each alternative.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/25619.

Frequency, Causes, and Outcomes of Return Visits to the Emergency Department Within 72 Hours: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background

Emergency departments (EDs) serve as an accessible gateway to healthcare system wherein numerous patients consider it a prime choice for medical complaints. Frequency of ED revisits, causes, and its burden are necessary to assess quality of care provided to patients and identify factors that leads to revisit.

Patients and Methods

Electronic and printed medical records of all patients who revisited ED from January to May 2016 within 72 hours of initial visit were reviewed. Patients’ cause of revisit were classified to three categories: patient-, physician- and system-related factors. Common complaints that require revisits were also collected. Descriptive analysis was performed and categorical variables were represented by the frequency; percentages and continuous variables were presented as median, and range if data did not follow normal distribution.

Results

Of the 79,279 patients who visited ED during the study period, 1.3% (1000) patients revisited within 72 hours; 51.3% (n=513) were males, with a mean age of 31.5 years (SD=17.7 years) where majority (57.1%) had no comorbidity recorded. The most attributed factors for revisit were as follows: patient-related causes 635 patients (63.5%), physician-related factors 167 patients (16.7%), and system-related factors 42 patients (4.2%); 15.6% were found not related to the initial visit. Recurrence of the same complaint was the highest among patient-related factors (80.5%), inadequate management and no improvement of symptoms in 71.3% among the physician-related factors. The most common ED revisit complaint was fever 29.1% (n=291). Outcomes of the revisit were mainly patient discharge 96.7% (n=967), admission 1.2% (n=12) and death in 0.2% (n=2).

Conclusion

Recurrence of the same complaint with no symptoms improvement and suboptimal management of physicians contributed to most of the ED revisits within 72 hours. Encouraging physicians to provide clear instructions in educating patients on discharge regarding disease progression and its red flags as to when a return to ED, might help in reducing revisit rate.

What is the prevalence of frequent attendance to emergency departments and what is the impact on emergency department utilisation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients who frequently attend to emergency departments are a varying group and have complex health care needs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the prevalence of patients who have frequent attendance to emergency departments. A systematic review was performed in line with PRISMA guidelines. A database search was conducted, and studies were included in the final review if they analysed a population of frequent attendance. Meta-analysis was performed only on population-based studies to estimate prevalence. The search yielded 2922 nonduplicate publications, of which 27 were included in the meta-analysis. The most common definition used for frequent attendance was greater than three presentations a year. The proportion of people who frequently attended as a percentage of the total study population ranged from 0.01 to 20.9%, with emergency department presentations from frequent attenders ranging from 0.2 to 34%. When limiting the definition of frequent attendance to greater than three visits in a 12-month period, people who frequently attended contributed between 3 and 10% [pooled estimate 6%; CI 4-7%] of emergency department presentations and between 12 and 34% [pooled estimate 21%; CI 15-27%] of total emergency department presentations. Meta-analysis found substantial heterogeneity between estimates [I² > 50%]. The prevalence of frequent attendance compared to the total population of patients seeking emergency care was small, but the impact on emergency department utilisation is significant. Early identification of people attending for frequent care at an emergency department provides the opportunity to implement alternative models of care.

Emergency Department "Bounce-Back" Rates as a Function of Emergency Medicine Training Year

Introduction: Since the 1990s, the emergency department (ED) unscheduled return visit (URV), or “bounce-back,” has been used as a quality of care measurement. During that time, resident training was also scrutinized and uncovered a need for closer resident supervision, especially of second-year residents. Over the years, bounce-backs have continued to be analyzed with vigor, but research on residency training and supervision has lagged with few studies concurrently investigating residency supervision and bounce-backs. Other literature on resident supervision suggests that with adequate attending supervision, resident performance is equivalent to attending performance. With that in mind, it was hypothesized that resident bounce-back rates will be equivalent to attending bounce-back rates, and there will be no change among residency years. The primary objective of this study was to determine the rate at which patients are seen as a bounce-back visit within 72 hours of their initial visit to a community hospital ED during the study time frame. The secondary aims were to evaluate if the ED bounce-back rate is impacted by training level (residents or attending) and to describe bounce-back patient characteristics, including primary complaint/disease, age, comorbidities and issues with compliance.

Methods: A retrospective chart review of 1000 charts was conducted from September 2015 to September 2017. Charts were randomly selected by the Quality & Patient Safety (QPS) team and, after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 732 charts were analysed. Inclusion criteria included age ≥ 18 years, patients treated by an Emergency Medicine (EM) resident during their initial visit and patients with a “discharge” disposition. Exclusion criteria included patients seen as a scheduled return visit (e.g., two-day return for blood pregnancy recheck, wound check, etc.). Demographics, initial visit variables, comorbidities and bounce-back data were collected based on electronic record query or chart review. Data was analysed using means, standard deviations, medians and ranges for continuous variables. Logistic regression modelling techniques were used to examine factors that affect whether the patient had a bounce-back visit.

Results: The rate of URVs within 72 hours of the patient's initial visit was 4.65%. PGY1 and PGY2's bounce-back rate was 3.8% and 3.6%, respectively, and PGY3 and PGY4's bounce-back rate was 5.7% and 5.6%, respectively (p-value=.63). There was no statistically significant change among residency years. Most bounce-back characteristics analysed including primary complaint, age, and comorbidities demonstrated no statistical significance in the increased rate of bounce-back except for patients with a history of tobacco abuse, alcohol abuse and chronic pain. Current smokers were 6.5 times more likely to bounce back than former smokers (odds ratio=6.485, 95% confidence interval = 2.089 to 20.133, p-value=0.0012) and those with chronic pain were 2.5 times more likely to bounce back than those without chronic pain (odds ratio=2.518, 95% confidence interval =1.029 to 6.164, p=0.0431).

Conclusion: EM residency training year does not increase the frequency of bounce-backs in a community hospital ED. Finally, patients with substance abuse and chronic pain were more likely to bounce back.

Physician-related factors associated with unscheduled revisits to the emergency department and admission to the intensive care unit within 72 h

Investigation of physician-related causes of unscheduled revisits to the emergency department (ED) within 72 h with subsequent admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) is an important parameter of emergency care quality. Between 2012 and 2017, medical records of all adult patients who visited the ED and returned within 72 h with subsequent ICU admission were retrospectively reviewed by three experienced emergency physicians. Study parameters were categorized into "input" (Patient characteristics), "throughput" (Time spent on first ED visit and seniority of emergency physicians, and "output" (Charlson Comorbidity Index). Of the 147 patients reviewed for the causes of ICU admission, 35 were physician-related (23.8%). Eight belonged to more urgent categories, whereas the majority (n = 27) were less urgent. Patients who spent less time on their first ED visits before discharge (< 2 h) were significantly associated with physician-related causes of ICU admission, whereas there was no significant difference in other "input," "throughput," and "output" parameters between the "physician-related" and "non-physician-related" groups. Short initial management time was associated with physician-related causes of ICU admission in patients with initial less urgent presentations, highlighting failure of the conventional triage system to identify potentially life-threatening conditions and possibility of misjudgement because of the patients' apparently minor initial presentations.

"Analysis of readmissions to the emergency department among patients presenting with abdominal pain"

BACKGROUND

Abdominal pain is one of the most common complaints among patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED). Diagnosis and management of abdominal pain may be a challenge and there are patients who require admission to the ED more than once in a short period of time. Our purpose was to assess the incidence of readmissions among patients treated in the ED due to abdominal pain and to investigate the impact of readmission on the further course of treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study, which included patients admitted to the ED in one academic, teaching hospital presenting with non-traumatic abdominal pain in a three-month period. Analyzed factors included demographic data, details related to first and subsequent visits in the ED and the course of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Overall, 928 patients were included to the study and 101 (10.88%) patients were admitted to the ED more than once during three-month period. Patients visiting ED repeatedly were older (p = 0.03) and more likely to be hospitalized (p < 0.01) compared to single-visit patients. Patients during their subsequent visits spent more time in the ED (p = 0.01), had greater chance to repeat their appointment (p = 0.04), be admitted to the hospital (p < 0.01) and were more likely diagnosed with cholelithiasis (p = 0.03) compared to patients on their initial visit. If admitted to the surgical department they were also more often qualified for surgical procedure than patients on their first visit (p < 0.01). In a group of patients admitted to the surgical department there were no significant differences in rates of conversion, postoperative complications and mortality between subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Readmissions among patients presenting with abdominal pain are a common phenomenon with prevalence of 10.88%. They are most commonly associated with cholelithiasis and occur more frequently among older patients, which suggests, that elderly require more attention during ED managements.

Influence of Overcrowding in the Emergency Department on Return Visit within 72 Hours

This study was conducted to determine whether overcrowding in the emergency department (ED) affects the occurrence of a return visit (RV) within 72 h. The crowding indicator of index visit was the average number of total patients, patients under observation, and boarding patients during the first 1 and 4 h from ED arrival time and the last 1 h before ED departure. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine whether each indicator affects the occurrence of RV and post-RV admission. Of the 87,360 discharged patients, 3743 (4.3%) returned to the ED within 72 h. Of the crowding indicators pertaining to total patients, the last 1 h significantly affected decrease in RV (p = 0.0046). Boarding patients were found to increase RV occurrence during the first 1 h (p = 0.0146) and 4 h (p = 0.0326). Crowding indicators that increased the likelihood of admission post-RV were total number of patients during the first 1 h (p = 0.0166) and 4 h (p = 0.0335) and evaluating patients during the first 1 h (p = 0.0059). Overcrowding in the ED increased the incidence of RV and likelihood of post-RV admission. However, overcrowding at the time of ED departure was related to reduced RV.

Characteristics of stakeholder involvement in systematic and rapid reviews: a methodological review in the area of health services research

OBJECTIVE

Engaging stakeholders in reviews is considered to generate more relevant evidence and to facilitate dissemination and use. As little is known about stakeholder involvement, we assessed the characteristics of their engagement in systematic and rapid reviews and the methodological quality of included studies. Stakeholders were people with a particular interest in the research topic.

DESIGN

Methodological review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Four databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, databases of the University of York, Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD)) were searched based on an a priori protocol. Four types of reviews (Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews, rapid and CRD rapid reviews) were retrieved between January 2011 and October 2015, pooled by potential review type and duplicates excluded. Articles were randomly ordered and screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria until 30 reviews per group were reached. Their methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR and stakeholder characteristics were collected.

RESULTS

In total, 57 822 deduplicated citations were detected with potential non-Cochrane systematic reviews being the biggest group (56 986 records). We found stakeholder involvement in 13% (4/30) of Cochrane, 20% (6/30) of non-Cochrane, 43% (13/30) of rapid and 93% (28/30) of CRD reviews. Overall, 33% (17/51) of the responding contact authors mentioned positive effects of stakeholder involvement. A conflict of interest statement remained unmentioned in 40% (12/30) of non-Cochrane and in 27% (8/30) of rapid reviews, but not in Cochrane or CRD reviews. At most, half of non-Cochrane and rapid reviews mentioned an a priori study protocol in contrast to all Cochrane reviews.

CONCLUSION

Stakeholder engagement was not general practice, except for CRD reviews, although it was more common in rapid reviews. Reporting factors, such as including an a priori study protocol and a conflict of interest statement should be considered in conjunction with involving stakeholders.

Risk Factors for Emergency Department Unscheduled Return Visits

Background and Objectives: This study aims to identify reasons for unscheduled return visits (URVs), and risk factors for diagnostic errors leading to URVs, with comparisons to data from a similar study conducted in the same institution 9 years ago. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included adult patients who attended the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary hospital in Singapore between January 2014 and June 2014, with re-attendance within 72 h for the same or similar complaint. The primary outcome was wrong or delayed diagnoses. Secondary outcomes include admission to the ED observation unit or ward on return visit. Findings were compared with the previous study performed in 2005 to identify trends. Results: Of 67,422 attendances, there were 1298 (1.93%) URVs from 1207 patients (median age 34, interquartile range 24 to 52 years; 59.7% male). The most common presenting complaint was abdominal pain (22.2%). One hundred ninety-one (15.8%) patients received an initial wrong or delayed diagnosis. Factors (adjusted odds ratio; 95% CI) associated with this were: presenting complaints of abdominal pain (2.99; 2.12–4.23), fever (1.60; 1.1–2.33), neurological deficit (4.26; 1.94–9.35), and discharge without follow-up (1.61; 1.1–2.26). Among re-attendances, 459 (38.0%) required admission. Factors (adjusted odds ratio; 95% CI) associated with admission were: male gender (1.88; 1.42 to 2.48); comorbidities of diabetes mellitus (2.07; 1.29–3.31), asthma (5.23; 1.59–17.26), and renal disease (7.48; 2.00–28.05); presenting complaints of abdominal pain (1.83; 1.32–2.55), fever (3.05; 2.10–4.44), and giddiness or vertigo (2.17; 1.26–3.73). There was a reduction in URV rate compared to the previous study in 2005 (1.93% versus 2.19%). Abdominal pain at the index visit remains a significant cause of URVs (22.2% versus 25.1%). Conclusions: Presenting complaints of neurological deficits, abdominal pain, fever, and discharge without follow-up were associated with wrong or delayed diagnoses among URVs.

Unplanned readmission prevention by a geriatric emergency network for transitional care (URGENT): a prospective before-after study

BACKGROUND

URGENT is a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) based nurse-led care model in the emergency department (ED) with geriatric follow-up after ED discharge aiming to prevent unplanned ED readmissions.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study (sequential design with two cohorts) was conducted in the ED of University Hospitals Leuven (Belgium). Dutch-speaking, community-dwelling ED patients aged 70 years or older were eligible for enrolment. Patients in the control cohort received usual care. Patient in the intervention cohort received the URGENT care model. A geriatric emergency nurse conducted CGA and interdisciplinary care planning among older patients identified as at risk for adverse events (e.g. unplanned ED readmission, functional decline) with the interRAI ED Screener© and clinical judgement of ED staff. Case manager follow-up was offered to at risk patients without hospitalization after index ED visit. For inpatients, geriatric follow-up was guaranteed on an acute geriatric ward or by the inpatient geriatric consultation team on a non-geriatric ward if considered necessary. Primary outcome was unplanned 90-day ED readmission. Secondary outcomes were ED length of stay (LOS), hospitalization rate, in-hospital LOS, 90-day higher level of care, 90-day functional decline and 90-day post-hospitalization mortality.

RESULTS

Almost half of intervention patients (404/886 = 45.6%) were categorized at risk. These received on average seven advices. Adherence rate to advices on the ED, during hospitalization and in community care was 86.1, 74.6 and 34.1%, respectively. One out of four at risk patients without hospitalization after index ED visit accepted case manager follow-up. Unplanned ED readmission occurred in 170 of 768 (22.1%) control patients and in 205 of 857 (23.9%) intervention patients (p = .11). The intervention group had shorter ED LOS (12.7 h versus 19.1 h in the control group; p < .001), but higher rate of hospitalization (70.0% versus 67.0% in the control group; p = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

The URGENT care model shortened ED LOS and increased the hospitalization rate, but did not prevent unplanned ED readmissions. A geriatric emergency nurse could improve in-hospital patient management, but failed to introduce substantial out-hospital case-management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol of this study was registered retrospectively with ISRCTN ( ISRCTN91449949 ; registered 20 June 2017).

Repeat Emergency Department Visits for Individuals With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and Psychiatric Disorders

Although individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and psychiatric concerns are more likely than others to visit hospital emergency departments (EDs), the frequency of their returns to the ED within a short time is unknown. In this population-based study we examined the likelihood of this group returning to the ED within 30 days of discharge and described these visits for individuals with IDD + psychiatric disorders (n = 3,275), and persons with IDD only (n = 1,944) compared to persons with psychiatric disorders only (n = 41,532). Individuals with IDD + psychiatric disorders, and individuals with IDD alone were more likely to make 30-day repeat ED visits. Improving hospital care and postdischarge community linkages may reduce 30-day returns to the ED among adults with IDD.

The impact of an emergency care access point on pediatric attendances at the emergency department: An observational study

OBJECTIVE

Crowding is a growing concern in general and pediatric Emergency Departments (EDs). The Emergency Care Access Point (ECAP) - a collaboration between general practitioners and the ED - has been established to reduce the number of self-referrals and non-urgent ED visits. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of an ECAP on pediatric attendances in the ED.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 3997 pediatric patients who visited the ED of a regional teaching hospital in the Netherlands, one year before and one year after the implementation of an ECAP. Patient characteristics, presented complaints and diagnoses, throughput times, and follow-up between the study groups were compared, both during office hours and after-hours.

RESULTS

After ECAP implementation, a 16.3% reduction in pediatric ED visits was observed. ECAP implementation was associated with a decline in self-referrals by 97.2%. Presented complaints, ED diagnoses and acuity were similar pre- and post-ECAP. However, consultations and follow-up were required more frequently. The admission rate during nights increased (49.3% versus 64.0%). Overall admission rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an ECAP was associated with a reduction of pediatric ED use, including a considerable but expected decline in pediatric self-referrals. Patient acuity pre- and post-ECAP was similar. Our results suggest that this primary care intervention might help reduce the workload in a pediatric ED. Future studies are warranted to further investigate this hypothesis and to evaluate the impact of an ECAP in other healthcare settings. These future efforts need to include patient oriented outcomes.

Incidence, characteristics and outcomes of patients that return to Emergency Departments. An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Unplanned return visits account for up to 5% of Emergency Department presentations in Australia and have been associated with adverse events and increased costs. A large number of studies examine the incidence, characteristics and outcomes of unplanned return visits but few studies examine the reasons for return from a patient perspective. The objective of this integrative review was to determine the incidence, characteristics, outcomes and reasons for unplanned return visits to Emergency Departments.

METHOD

An integrative literature review design was employed to conduct a structured search of the literature using the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, ProQuest and EMBASE (inception to June 2018). Results were screened using predefined criteria and final studies collated and appraised using a quality assessment tool.

RESULTS

Fifty-two primary research articles were included in the review. The timeframe used to capture unplanned return visits varied and the incidence ranged between 0.07% and 33%. The majority of patients who return unplanned to the Emergency Department are subsequently discharged (51% and 90%) without an adverse event.

CONCLUSION

There is no consensus on the timeframe employed to classify unplanned return visits to the Emergency Department and the commonly used 72h lacks evidence. Routine statewide data linkage to capture return visits to other facilities is needed to ensure accurate data about this vulnerable patient group. Further research that focuses on patient and clinician perspectives is required to facilitate the development of local strategies to reduce the incidence of avoidable unplanned return visits.

Unscheduled early revisit to emergency department

Background:

Unscheduled revisits to the emergency department may present a considerable additional workload.

Objectives:

This study investigated the risk factors contributing to adverse event during unscheduled early revisit to Emergency Department Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Methods:

A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2014 to January 2015 to character the nature of unscheduled early revisits to Emergency Department Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. It included all patients 18 years old and above, revisited emergency department within 9 days post discharge from emergency department.

Results:

Data were collected from 492 case records. The rate of emergency department unplanned revisits within 9 days of previous emergency department discharge was 0.66% for the study period. Risk factors for revisit included advance age, pre-existing co-morbidities, duration spent during first emergency department visit and health care system–related error. The independent predictors of morbidity were diabetes mellitus (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidential interval, 1.08–3.96), respiratory disease (odds ratio, 2.42; 95% confidential interval, 1.18–4.98), gastrointestinal disease (odds ratio, 5.93; 95% confidential interval: 1.29, 27.35), nervous system disease (odds ratio, 4.65; 95% confidential interval: 1.27, 17.02), duration spent more than 6 h during first emergency department visit (odds ratio, 3.05; 95% confidential interval: 1.53, 6.07), and medical error leading to admission (odds ratio, 8.85; 95% confidential interval: 4.43, 17.67). The overall mortality rate was 0.2% (1/492).

Conclusion:

Emergency department physicians need to be extra vigilant when managing patients with risk factors, particularly the modifiable risk factors, to curb emergency department revisit.

Risk Factors Associated With Emergency Department Return Visits Following Trauma System Discharge

OBJECTIVES

Little evidence exists in the pediatric trauma literature regarding what factors are associated with re-presentation to the hospital for patients discharged from the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of trauma system activations at a pediatric trauma center from June 30, 2007, through June 30, 2013, who were subsequently discharged from the ED or after a brief inpatient stay. Returns within 30 days were reviewed. χ, Student t test, and univariate logistical regression were used to compare predictive factors for those returning and not.

RESULTS

One thousand eight hundred sixty-three patient encounters were included in the cohort. Seventy-two patients (3.9%) had at least 1 return visit that was related to the original trauma activation. Age, sex, language, race/ethnicity, ED length of stay, arrival mode, level of trauma activation, and transfer from an outside hospital did not vary significantly between the groups. Patients with public insurance were almost 2 times more likely to return compared with those with private insurance (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.35). Income by zip code was associated with the risk of a return visit, with patients in neighborhoods at less than the 50th percentile income twice as likely to return to the ED (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with public insurance and those from low-income neighborhoods were significantly more likely to return to the ED after trauma system activation. These data can be used to target interventions to decrease returns in high-risk trauma patients.

Unintentional injuries among refugee and immigrant children and youth in Ontario, Canada: a population-based cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Unintentional injuries are a leading reason for seeking emergency care. Refugees face vulnerabilities that may contribute to injury risk. We aimed to compare the rates of unintentional injuries in immigrant children and youth by visa class and region of origin.

METHODS

Population-based, cross-sectional study of children and youth (0-24 years) from immigrant families residing in Ontario, Canada, from 2011 to 2012. Multiple linked health and administrative databases were used to describe unintentional injuries by immigration visa class and region of origin. Poisson regression models estimated rate ratios for injuries.

RESULTS

There were 6596.0 and 8122.3 emergency department visits per 100 000 non-refugee and refugee immigrants, respectively. Hospitalisation rates were 144.9 and 185.2 per 100 000 in each of these groups. The unintentional injury rate among refugees was 20% higher than among non-refugees (adjusted rate ratio (ARR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.16, 1.24). In both groups, rates were lowest among East and South Asians. Young age, male sex, and high income were associated with injury risk. Compared with non-refugees, refugees had higher rates of injury across most causes, including for motor vehicle injuries (ARR 1.51, 95% CI 1.40, 1.62), poisoning (ARR 1.40, 95% CI 1.26, 1.56) and suffocation (ARR 1.39, 95% CI 1.04, 1.84).

INTERPRETATION

The observed 20% higher rate of unintentional injuries among refugees compared with non-refugees highlights an important opportunity for targeting population-based public health and safety interventions. Engaging refugee families shortly after arrival in active efforts for injury prevention may reduce social vulnerabilities and cultural risk factors for injury in this population.

Factors Affecting Unscheduled Return Visits to the Emergency Department among Minor Head Injury Patients

Study Objectives

Differences between returning and non-returning minor head injury (MHI) emergency department (ED) patients, between the characteristics of the first visit and revisit, and between admitted and nonadmitted returning patients were investigated.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. All discharged ED patients with ICD-9 codes 850.0 to 850.9, 920, and 959.01 in 2013 were enrolled. Patients' demographic data, vital signs, Glasgow Coma Scale, ED diagnosis, length of stay, triage levels, ED examinations performed, and comorbidities were recorded for analysis.

Results

A total of 2,815 patients were enrolled. Of 57 (2%) patients who revisited the ED, 47 (82%) were discharged from the ED and ten (18%) were admitted to the hospital. Patients who returned to the ED were older, and they exhibited more comorbidities. Those who presented with vomiting, triage level of 1 or 2, and GCS score of <15 and who received more blood tests during their first visit were more likely to be admitted when they returned to the ED.

Conclusions

Discharging MHI patients who are older or exhibit comorbidities only when symptoms and concerns are relieved completely, providing clear discharge instructions, and arranging timely clinical follow-ups may help reduce such patients' return rate.

Predicting return visits to the emergency department for pediatric patients: Applying supervised learning techniques to the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Return visits (RVs) to the emergency department (ED) consume medical resources and may represent a patient safety issue. The occurrence of unexpected RVs is considered a performance indicator for ED care quality. Because children are susceptible to medical errors and utilize considerable ED resources, knowing the factors that affect RVs in pediatric patients helps improve the quality of pediatric emergency care.

METHODS

We collected data on visits made by patients aged ≤18years to EDs from the National Health Insurance Research Database. The outcome of interest was a RV within 3days of the initial visit. Potential factors were categorized into demographics, medical history, features of ED visits, physician characteristics, hospital characteristics, and treatment-seeking behavior. A multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of RVs. We compared the performance of various data mining techniques, including Naïve Bayes, classification and regression tree (CART), random forest, and logistic regression, in predicting RVs. Finally, we developed a decision tree to stratify the risk of RVs.

RESULTS

Of 125,940 visits, 6,282 (5.0%) were followed by a RV within 3 days. Predictors of RVs included younger age, higher acuity, intravenous fluid, more examination types, complete blood count, consultation, lower hospital level, hospitalization within one week before the initial visit, frequent ED visits in the past one year, and visits made in Spring or on Saturdays. Patients with allergic diseases and those underwent ultrasound examination were less likely to return. Decision tree models performed better in predicting RVs in terms of area under curve. The decision tree constructed using the CART technique showed that the number of ED visits in the past one year, diagnosis category, testing of complete blood count, and age were important discriminators of risk of RVs.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several factors which are associated with RVs to the ED in pediatric patients. The knowledge of these factors may help assess risk of RVs in the ED and guide physicians to reevaluate and provide interventions to children belonging to the high risk groups before ED discharge.

Which unscheduled return visits indicate a quality-of-care issue?

BACKGROUND

The rate of unscheduled return visits is often used as a quality-of-care indicator in EDs, although its validity is not yet fully established. Our aim was to identify the characteristics of return visits that may be attributed to problems in quality of care.

METHODS

Retrospective paired review of medical charts in a random sample of return visits during the 72 hours following discharge from the ED in three hospitals of Andalusia, Spain in 2013. Charts were reviewed by senior medical physicians to determine which return visits reflected quality-of-care problems. Time frame for return visit, index and return visit acuity, disposition and diagnosis were compared with determine which variables were associated with a quality problem. Sensitivity and specificity for each variable to indicate a quality problem were determined.

RESULTS

We studied the causes of 895 return visits, finding that 65 (7.3%) were due to inadequate quality of care in the index visit. Potentially avoidable return visits were more common in more severely ill patients, in those with greater severity in the return than in the index visit and in patients hospitalised after the return. The combination of this three variables presented sensitivity 66% and specificity 68% in identification of quality-related returns.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall level of return visits cannot be considered a valid indicator of quality of care. However, certain specific variables, including the level of severity of the patient's condition or the discharge destination following the return visits, could be considered valid in this respect.

Quality of conduct and reporting in rapid reviews: an exploration of compliance with PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines

BACKGROUND

Rapid reviews are an accelerated evidence synthesis approach intended to meet the timely needs of decision-makers in healthcare settings. Quality of conduct and reporting has been described in the rapid review literature; however, no formal assessment has been carried out using available instruments. The objective of this study was to explore compliance with conduct and reporting guidelines in rapid reviews published or posted online during 2013 and 2014.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search for rapid reviews using multiple bibliographic databases (e.g. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library) through December 31, 2014. Grey literature was searched thoroughly, and health technology assessment agencies were surveyed to identify additional rapid review products. Candidate reviews were assessed for inclusion using pre-specified eligibility criteria. Detailed data was collected from the included reviews on study and reporting characteristics and variables significant to rapid reviews (e.g. nomenclature, definition). We evaluated the quality of conduct and reporting of included rapid reviews using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklists. Compliance with each checklist item was examined, and the sum of adequately reported items was used to describe overall compliance. Rapid reviews were stratified to explore differences in compliance related to publication status. The association between compliance and time to completion or length of publication was explored through univariate regression.

RESULTS

Sixty-six rapid reviews were included. There were heterogeneous nomenclature, research questions and approaches to rapid reviews. Compliance with AMSTAR and PRISMA checklists was poor. Published rapid reviews were compliant with individual PRISMA items more often than unpublished reviews, but no difference was seen in AMSTAR item compliance overall. There was evidence of an association between length of publication and time to completion and the number of adequately reported PRISMA or AMSTAR items.

CONCLUSIONS

Transparency and inadequate reporting are significant limitations of rapid reviews. Scientific editors, authors and producing agencies should ensure that the reporting of conduct and findings is accurate and complete. Further research may be warranted to explore reporting and conduct guidelines specific to rapid reviews and how these guidelines may be applied across the spectrum of rapid review approaches.

Crisis Reliability Indicators Supporting Emergency Services (CRISES): A Framework for Developing Performance Measures for Behavioral Health Crisis and Psychiatric Emergency Programs

Crisis and emergency psychiatric services are an integral part of the healthcare system, yet there are no standardized measures for programs providing these services. We developed the Crisis Reliability Indicators Supporting Emergency Services (CRISES) framework to create measures that inform internal performance improvement initiatives and allow comparison across programs. The framework consists of two components-the CRISES domains (timely, safe, accessible, least-restrictive, effective, consumer/family centered, and partnership) and the measures supporting each domain. The CRISES framework provides a foundation for development of standardized measures for the crisis field. This will become increasingly important as pay-for-performance initiatives expand with healthcare reform.

Incidence of and Predictors for Early Return Visits to the Emergency Department: A Population-Based Survey

The aim of this study is to estimate the proportion of and predictors for early return visits (ERVs) to the emergency department (ED) in Taiwan.This is a population-based study using data of 1 million people randomly selected from all beneficiaries of the Taiwan National Health Insurance. All ED visits in 2012 were analyzed. The ERVs to the ED were defined as those ED revisits within 3 days after the initial ED visit. We employed a generalized estimation equation model to investigate the independent effects of various characteristics associated with the initial ED visit on ERVs.The overall proportion of ERVs within 3 days with a same dichotomous diagnostic category according to injury or noninjury was 4.3% (6740/158,132), and the overall proportion of hospitalizations after ERVs was 24.1% (1627/6740). Male subjects (4.3%) were more likely to have ERVs with an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 1.10 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.16). Compared with patients aged 18 to 64 years (4.0%), those aged >64 years had a significantly increased risk of ERVs (6.2%, AOR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.39-1.59). In comparison to patients with injury diagnoses (2.2%), those with noninjury diagnoses had a higher risk of ERVs (5.2%, AOR: 2.50, 95% CI: 2.33-2.70). Compared with patients initially treated at medical centers (3.7%), those initially treated at regional (4.5%, AOR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.20-1.37) or district hospitals (4.5%, AOR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.27-1.49) had significantly higher risks of ERVs. Among the 6740 patients with ERVs, 2622 (38.9%) returned to a different hospital, and these patients tended to be those aged 18 to 64 years and initially treated at district hospitals.The risk of ERVs was associated with demographic characteristics and accreditation level of hospital. We noted a large proportion of patients with ERVs to a different hospital. The reason underlying this phenomenon warrants further investigations.

Improving emergency department throughput: An outcomes evaluation of two additional models of care

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore the impact of incorporating a physician at triage (PAT) and the implementation of a medical assessment unit (MAU) on emergency department (ED) patient throughput.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative analysis of two additional models of care (standard care, T1; PAT, T2 and PATplusMAU, T3) was undertaken. Patient presentations to a large public teaching hospital in South-East Queensland between 10th January 2013 and 25th February 2013, and the same time period in 2012, were included. The impact of these care models on ED length of stay and other outcomes (time to be seen by a clinician, time from bed request to ward transfer, meeting 4 hour transit targets, admission rates and the proportion of patients who did not wait) were compared.

RESULTS

Compared to standard care, ED length of stay appeared to decrease with the introduction of both models, but was only significantly decreased after PATplusMAU was implemented (2013; T1, 186 min; T2, 181 min; T3, 175 min: T1 vs T3, P < 0.001). Outcomes that improved included: time to be seen by a clinician, proportion of patients who did not wait; increase in meeting 4-hour length of stay target for both admitted and not-admitted patients.

CONCLUSION

Placing a physician at triage and implementing a medical assessment unit were viable models of care that promoted patient flow and helped meet several time-sensitive health service targets.

Unscheduled-return-visits after an emergency department (ED) attendance and clinical link between both visits in patients aged 75 years and over: a prospective observational study

Background

Predictors of unscheduled return visits (URV), best time-frame to evaluate URV rate and clinical relationship between both visits have not yet been determined for the elderly following an ED visit.

Methods

We conducted a prospective-observational study including 11,521 patients aged ≥75-years and discharged from ED (5,368 patients (53.5%)) or hospitalized after ED visit (6,153 patients). Logistic Regression and time-to-failure analyses including Cox proportional model were performed.

Results

Mean time to URV was 17 days; 72-hour, 30-day and 90-day URV rates were 1.8%, 6.1% and 10% respectively. Multivariate analysis indicates that care-pathway and final disposition decisions were significantly associated with a 30-day URV. Thus, we evaluated predictors of 30-day URV rates among non-admitted and hospitalized patient groups. By using the Cox model we found that, for non-admitted patients, triage acuity and diagnostic category and, for hospitalized patients, that visit time (day, night) and diagnostic categories were significant predictors (p<0.001). For URV, we found that 25% were due to closely related-clinical conditions. Time lapses between both visits constituted the strongest predictor of closely related-clinical conditions.

Conclusion

Our study shows that a decision of non-admission in emergency departments is linked with an accrued risk of URV, and that some diagnostic categories are also related for non-admitted and hospitalized subjects alike. Our study also demonstrates that the best time frame to evaluate the URV rate after an ED visit is 30 days, because this is the time period during which most URVs and cases with close clinical relationships between two visits are concentrated. Our results suggest that URV can be used as an indicator or quality.