How do we identify acute medical admissions that are suitable for same day emergency care?

Quality metrics for same day emergency care-Consensus of a multi-professional panel of experts using a modified Delphi process

Same Day Emergency Care (SDEC) services are at the heart of recovery plans for Emergency Care in the National Health Service. There are no validated metrics for the quality of care in SDEC. The Society for Acute Medicine's Quality Improvement Committee invited to a three-stage modified Delphi process to gather metrics used by clinicians. Proposed metrics were ranked and further explored by 33 participating experts from a broad range of backgrounds including clinicians, data scientists and operational managers. Experts ranked five system-based metrics highest. These focus on optimisation of the proportion of patients receiving same day care in and out of SDEC units. Patient and staff experience metrics were ranked low, possibly due to present lack of viable examples. The paper adds a glossary with the rationale for ranking of metrics and their use for the improvement of quality and safety of clinical care.

What is the existing evidence base for adult medical Same Day Emergency Care in UK NHS hospitals? A scoping review

Introduction

This scoping review focuses on acute medical Same Day Emergency Care (SDEC), as medical patients represent a significant proportion of emergency admissions in the NHS.

Methods

This scoping review has been conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology and as detailed in the published scoping review protocol.

Results

Identified papers included two observational cohort studies, four audits, four review articles, two opinion pieces, a paper on potential future developments, three policy documents, one strategy paper and a position statement. Key themes were extrapolated and discussed in a narrative.

Conclusions

The scarcity of literature in relation to the quality, safety, and effectiveness of SDEC highlights the need for further study. Therefore, there is a pressing need for SDEC specific research within the UK.

Performance of admission pathways within acute medicine services: Analysis from the Society for Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit 2022 and comparison with performance 2019 - 2021

Urgent and emergency care services face increasing pressure, impacting patient care. We evaluated the performance of acute medicine services, assessing clinical quality indicators for unplanned medical admissions to acute hospital services. 152 acute UK hospital services accepting unplanned admissions to acute and general internal medicine completed a day-of-care survey incorporating organisational structure questionnaire and patient-level data over a pre-defined 24-hour period in June 2022. Clinical quality indicators were: Early Warning Score (EWS) measurement within 30 min of hospital arrival; clinician assessment within 4 h; assessment by consultant physician within 6 h (daytime) or 14 h (night-time). Results were compared with 2019, 2020, 2021. 7293 sequential patients were included (and compared with 19,817 patients across 2019-2021). In 2022, 69% of patients (95%CI 67.7-69.9%) had an EWS documented within 30 min. 79% of patients (95%CI 77.8-79.7%) were reviewed by a clinical decision maker within 4 h of hospital arrival. Patients assessed in Same Day Emergency Care services were more likely to meet this target than those assessed in Acute Medical Units or Emergency Departments (OR 2.4, 95%CI 2.02-2.87, p<0.001). Overall, 50% of patients received consultant physician review within the target time (3065/6161, 95%CI 48.5-51.0%); performance varied with time of arrival and location of initial assessment. Performance against all three clinical quality indicators was lower than 2019, 2020 and 2021 (p<0.001 for all). Performance against all quality indicators within acute medicine services is deteriorating. However, performance in Same Day Emergency Care Units is greater than in Acute Medical Units or Emergency Departments.

The impact of frailty and geriatric syndromes on metrics of acute care performance: results of a national day of care survey

Background

Frailty is associated with a range of adverse clinical outcomes in the acute hospital setting. We sought to determine whether frailty and related factors affected clinical processes such as time to assessment during emergency hospital admission within the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK.

Methods

The Society for Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit (SAMBA) is an annual cross-sectional day of care survey. SAMBA 2022 was conducted on Thursday 23rd June 2022. We assessed whether the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and presence of a geriatric syndrome affected performance against nationally recognised clinical quality indicators based on time to initial assessment and time to consultant review. CFS was graded into robust (CFS1-3), mild (CFS 4-5), moderate (CFS 6), severe (CFS7-8) and terminal illness (CFS 9). Plausible values were created for missing variables using multi-level multiple imputation. The association was described using mixed effect generalised linear models adjusting for initial National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) and time of arrival.

Findings

A total of 152 hospitals provided patient level data relating to 7248 emergency medical admissions. Patients with mild, moderate and severe frailty were less likely to be assessed within 4 h of arrival (adjusted OR, mild 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.96, moderate 0.67 95% CI 0.53-0.84, severe, 0.75 95% CI 0.58-0.96, terminally ill 0.59 95% CI 0.23-1.43) and less likely to be achieve the clinical quality indicator for consultant review (adjusted OR, mild 0.69 95% CI 0.58-0.83, moderate 0.55 95% CI 0.44-0.70, severe 0.54 95% CI 0.41-0.69, terminally ill 0.76 95% CI 0.42-1.5). Patients with geriatric syndromes were also less likely to be assessed within 4 h of arrival (adjusted OR 0.66 95% CI 0.56-0.76) or by a consultant within the recommended time frame (adjusted OR 0.45 95% CI 0.39-0.51). The difference was partially explained by differential use of SDEC pathways. Sub-group analysis of 5148 patients assessed outside of SDEC areas demonstrated patients with geriatric syndromes (adjusted OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60-0.83), but not frailty defined by CFS were less likely to be assessed within 4 h of arrival. Moderate and severe frailty and the presence of a geriatric syndrome were associated with a decreased likelihood of achieving the consultant review standard (moderate, adjusted OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.94, severe adjusted OR 0.75 95% CI 0.58-0.96, geriatric syndrome adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.50-0.69).

Interpretation

Frailty is associated with delayed clinical assessment. This association may suggest a systemic issue with clinical prioritisation, with important implications for acute care policy.

Funding

The database for SAMBA is funded by the Society for Acute Medicine.

What is the existing evidence base for adult medical same day emergency care in UK NHS hospitals? A scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVES

Same day emergency care (SDEC) is a new model of care, which has emerged over the past 5 years, building on prior ambulatory care services. The National Health Service (NHS) England National Strategy for SDEC suggests SDEC can meet local health needs by providing alternatives to emergency department attendance or hospital admission, for people with an urgent healthcare need, beyond the limited scope of an urgent treatment centre. This review focuses on acute medical SDEC, as medical patients represent a significant proportion of emergency admissions. The planned scoping review aims to map the existing evidence base.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a protocol for a scoping review to be conducted in accordance with the format of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. The databases to be searched will include EMBASE, MEDLINE and CINAHL, via EBSCOhost. Sources of unpublished studies, policies and grey literature will include Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, TRIP database, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Open, and the Health Management Information Consortium. Papers relating to acute medicine adult patients attending NHS SDEC services in the UK will be included. International papers will be excluded, as will those over 5 years old, and those where full text is not available. The results of the search and study inclusion/exclusion process will be reported and presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram. Data will be extracted from papers included in the scoping review by two reviewers, using a JBI data extraction tool. Any differences of opinion will be discussed until consensus is reached. If needed, a third reviewer will be asked to join the review team to achieve consensus. Data and themes extracted will be summarised and presented in tables. A narrative thematic summary will accompany the presented results, describing how the results relate to the review objective. Literature gaps will be identified and recommendations for future research made.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

There is no requirement for ethical approval for this scoping review. On completion, it will be published in a peer-reviewed academic journal and presented at a conference.

Performance of scoring systems in selecting short stay medical admissions suitable for assessment in same day emergency care: an analysis of diagnostic accuracy in a UK hospital setting

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of the Amb score and Glasgow Admission Prediction Score (GAPS) in identifying acute medical admissions suitable for same day emergency care (SDEC) in a large urban secondary centre.

DESIGN

Retrospective assessment of routinely collected data from electronic healthcare records.

SETTING

Single large urban tertiary care centre.

PARTICIPANTS

All unplanned admissions to general medicine on Monday-Friday, episodes starting 08:00-16:59 hours and lasting up to 48 hours, between 1 April 2019 and 9 March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of the Amb score and GAPS in identifying patients discharged within 12 hours of arrival.

RESULTS

7365 episodes were assessed. 94.6% of episodes had an Amb score suggesting suitability for SDEC. The positive predictive value of the Amb score in identifying those discharged within 12 hours was 54.5% (95% CI 53.3% to 55.8%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for the Amb score was 0.612 (95% CI 0.599 to 0.625).42.4% of episodes had a GAPS suggesting suitability for SDEC. The positive predictive value of the GAPS in identifying those discharged within 12 hours was 50.5% (95% CI 48.4% to 52.7%). The AUROC for the GAPS was 0.606 (95% CI 0.590 to 0.622).41.4% of the population had both an Amb and GAPS score suggestive of suitability for SDEC and 5.7% of the population had both and Amb and GAPS score suggestive of a lack of suitability for SDEC.

CONCLUSIONS

The Amb score and GAPS had poor discriminatory ability to identify acute medical admissions suitable for discharge within 12 hours, limiting their utility in selecting patients for assessment within SDEC services within this diverse patient population.