Project description:We examined how emergency department (ED) visits for potentially preventable, mental health, and other diagnoses were related to same-day access and provider continuity in primary care using administrative data from 71,296 patients in 22 VHA clinics over a three-year period. ED visits were categorized as non-emergent; primary care treatable; preventable; not preventable; or mental health-related. We conducted multi-level regression models adjusted for patient and clinic factors. More same-day access significantly predicted fewer non-emergent and primary care treatable ED visits while continuity was not significantly related to any type of ED visit. Neither measure was related to ED visits for mental health problems.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Unplanned visits to the emergency department (ED) and inpatient setting are expensive and associated with poor outcomes in thoracic surgery. We assessed 30-d postoperative ED visits and inpatient readmissions following thoracotomy, a high morbidity procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed inpatient and ED administrative data from California, Florida, and New York, 2010-2011. "Return to care" was defined as readmission to inpatient facility or ED within 30 d of discharge. Factors associated with return to care were analyzed via multivariable logistic regressions with a fixed effect for hospital variability. RESULTS:Of 30,154 thoracotomies, 6.3% were admitted to the ED and 10.2% to the inpatient setting within 30 d of discharge. Increased risk of inpatient readmission was associated with Medicare (odds ratio [OR] 1.30; P < 0.001) and Medicaid (OR 1.31; P < 0.0001) insurance status compared to private insurance and black race (OR 1.18; P = 0.02) compared to white race. Lung cancer diagnosis (OR 0.83; P < 0.001) and higher median income (OR 0.89; P = 0.04) were associated with decreased risk of inpatient readmission. Postoperative ED visits were associated with Medicare (OR 1.24; P < 0.001) and Medicaid insurance status (OR 1.59; P < 0.001) compared to private insurance and Hispanic race (OR 1.19; P = 0.04) compared to white race. CONCLUSIONS:Following thoracotomy, postoperative ED visits and inpatient readmissions are common. Patients with public insurance were at high risk for readmission, while patients with underlying lung cancer diagnosis had a lower readmission risk. Emphasizing postoperative management in at-risk populations could improve health outcomes and reduce unplanned returns to care.
Project description:ObjectiveAdmissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are often used to measure potentially preventable emergency care. Visits to emergency departments with ACSCs may also be preventable care but are excluded from such measures if patients are not admitted. We established the extent and composition of this preventable emergency care.MethodsWe analysed 1,505,979 emergency department visits (5% of the national total) between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2017 at six hospital Trusts in England, using International Classification of Diseases diagnostic coding. We calculated the number of visits for each ACSC and examined the proportions of these visits that did not result in admission by condition and patient characteristics.Results11.1% of emergency department visits were for ACSCs. 55.0% of these visits did not result in hospital admission. Whilst the majority of ACSC visits were for acute rather than chronic conditions (59.4% versus 38.4%), acute visits were much more likely to conclude without admission (70.3% versus 33.4%). Younger, more deprived and ethnic minority patients were less likely to be admitted when they visited the emergency department with an ACSC.ConclusionsOver half of preventable emergency care is not captured by measures of admissions. The probability of admission at a preventable visit varies substantially between conditions and patient groups. Focussing only on admissions for ACSCs provides an incomplete and skewed picture of the types of conditions and patients receiving preventable care. Measures of preventable emergency care should include visits in addition to admissions.
Project description:Long-term care residents with suspected fractures as a result of a fall typically transfer to the emergency department (ED) for diagnostic imaging and care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, transfer to the hospital increased the risk of COVID-19 exposure and resulted in extended isolation days for the resident. A fracture care pathway was developed and implemented to provide rapid diagnostic imaging results and stabilization in the care home, reducing transportation and exposure risk to COVID-19. Eligible residents with a stable fracture would receive a referral to a designated fracture clinic for consultation; fracture care is provided in the care home by long-term care staff. Evaluation of the pathway was completed and demonstrated that 100% of residents did not transfer to the ED and 47% of the residents did not transfer to a fracture clinic for additional care.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the impact of integrating behavioral health services using the primary care behavioral health (PCBH) model on emergency department (ED) utilization. DATA SOURCES:Utilization data from three Dane County, Wisconsin hospitals and four primary care clinics from 2003 to 2011. STUDY DESIGN:We used a retrospective, quasi-experimental, controlled, pre-post study design. Starting in 2007, two clinics began integrating behavioral health into their primary care practices with a third starting in 2010. A fourth, nonimplementing, community clinic served as control. Change in emergency department and primary care utilization (number of visits) for patients diagnosed with mood and anxiety disorders was the outcomes of interest. DATA COLLECTION:Retrospective data were obtained from electronic patient records from the three main area hospitals along with primary care data from participating clinics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Following the introduction of the PCBH model, one clinic experienced a statistically significant (p < .01, 95 percent CI 6.3-16.3 percent), 11.3 percent decrease in the ratio of ED visits to primary care encounters, relative to a control site, but two other intervention clinics did not. CONCLUSIONS:The PCBH model may be associated with a reduction in ED utilization, but better-controlled studies are needed to confirm this result.
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the impact of urgent care centers on emergency department (ED) use.Data sourcesSecondary data from a novel urgent care center database, linked to the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Emergency Department Databases (SEDD) from six states.Study designWe used a difference-in-differences design to examine ZIP code-level changes in the acuity mix of emergency department visits when local urgent care centers were open versus closed. ZIP codes with no urgent care centers served as a control group. We tested for differential impacts of urgent care centers according to ED wait time and patient insurance status.Data collection/extraction methodsUrgent care center daily operating times were determined via the urgent care center database. Emergency department visit acuity was assessed by applying the NYU ED algorithm to the SEDD data. Urgent care locations and nearby emergency department encounters were linked via zip code.Principal findingsWe found that having an open urgent care center in a ZIP code reduced the total number of ED visits by residents in that ZIP code by 17.2% (P < 0.05), due largely to decreases in visits for less emergent conditions. This effect was concentrated among visits to EDs with the longest wait times. We found that urgent care centers reduced the total number of uninsured and Medicaid visits to the ED by 21% (P < 0.05) and 29.1% (P < 0.05), respectively.ConclusionsDuring the hours they are open, urgent care centers appear to be treating patients who otherwise would have visited the ED. This suggests that urgent care centers have the potential to reduce health care expenditures, though questions remain about their net cost impact. Future work should assess whether urgent care centers can improve health care access among populations that often experience barriers to receiving timely care.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:We hypothesized that inpatient postoperative pain trajectories are associated with 30-day inpatient readmission and emergency department (ED) visits. BACKGROUND:Surgical readmissions have few known modifiable predictors. Pain experienced by patients may reflect surgical complications and/or inadequate or difficult symptom management. METHODS:National Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement data on inpatient general, vascular, and orthopedic surgery from 2008 to 2014 were merged with laboratory, vital sign, health care utilization, and postoperative complications data. Six distinct postoperative inpatient patient-reported pain trajectories were identified: (1) persistently low, (2) mild, (3) moderate or (4) high trajectories, and (5) mild-to-low or (6) moderate-to-low trajectories based on postoperative pain scores. Regression models estimated the association between pain trajectories and postdischarge utilization while controlling for important patient and clinical variables. RESULTS:Our sample included 211,231 surgeries-45.4% orthopedics, 37.0% general, and 17.6% vascular. Overall, the 30-day unplanned readmission rate was 10.8%, and 30-day ED utilization rate was 14.2%. Patients in the high pain trajectories had the highest rates of postdischarge readmissions and ED visits (14.4% and 16.3%, respectively, P < 0.001). In multivariable models, compared with the persistently low pain trajectory, there was a dose-dependent increase in postdischarge ED visits and readmission for pain-related diagnoses, but not postdischarge complications (? trend P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Postoperative pain trajectories identify populations at risk for 30-day readmissions and ED visits, and do not seem to be mediated by postdischarge complications. Addressing pain control expectations before discharge may help reduce surgical readmissions in high pain categories.
Project description:PURPOSE:Previous work has demonstrated that home care patients have an increased risk of visiting the emergency department after a home nursing visit on the same day. We investigated whether this association is modified by greater access to after-hours primary care. METHODS:We conducted a population-based case-crossover study of home care patients in Ontario, Canada in 2014-2016. Emergency department visits after 5:00 pm were selected as case periods and matched, within the same patient, to control periods within the previous week. The association between home nursing visits and same-day emergency department visits was estimated with conditional logistic regression. Access to after-hours primary care, measured on the patient and practice level, was tested for effect modification using an interaction term approach. Analysis was performed separately for all emergency department visits and a less urgent subset not admitted to hospital. RESULTS:A total of 11,840 patients contributed cases to the analysis. Patients with a history of after-hours primary care use had a smaller increased risk of a same-day after-hours emergency department visit (OR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.06-1.30) compared with patients with no after-hours care (OR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.39). The modifying effect was stronger among emergency department visits not admitted to hospital (OR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.97-1.28 vs OR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.31-1.51). CONCLUSION:Greater access to after-hours primary care reduced the risk of less-urgent emergency department use associated with home nursing visits. These findings suggest increasing access to after-hours primary care could prevent some less-urgent emergency department visits.
Project description:Background and objectivesIn 2011, there were approximately 131 million visits to an emergency department in the United States. Emergency department visits have increased over time, far outpacing growth of the general population. There is a paucity of data evaluating emergency department visits among kidney transplant recipients. We sought to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for emergency department visits after initial hospital discharge after transplantation in the United States.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe identified 10,533 kidney transplant recipients from California, New York, and Florida between 2009 and 2012 using the State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases included in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. We used multivariable Poisson and Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate adjusted incidence rates and time to emergency department visits after transplantation.ResultsThere were 17,575 emergency department visits over 13,845 follow-up years (overall rate =126.9/100 patient-years; 95% confidence interval, 125.1 to 128.8). The cumulative incidences of emergency department visits at 1, 12, and 24 months were 12%, 40%, and 57%, respectively, with median time =19 months; 48% of emergency department visits led to hospital admission. Risk factors for higher emergency department rates included younger age, women, black and Hispanic race/ethnicity, public insurance, depression, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and emergency department use before transplant. There was wide variation in emergency department visits by individual transplant center (10th percentile =70.0/100 patient-years; median =124.6/100 patient-years; and 90th percentile =187.4/100 patient-years).ConclusionsThe majority of kidney transplant recipients will visit an emergency department in the first 2 years post-transplantation, with significant variation by patient characteristics and individual centers. As such, coordination of care through the emergency department is a critical component of post-transplant management, and specific acumen of transplant-related care is needed among emergency department providers. Additional research assessing best processes of care for post-transplant management and health care expenditures and outcomes associated with emergency department visits for transplant recipients are warranted.
Project description:Background/objectivesThis study examined urban/rural differences in the frequency of preventable emergency department (ED) visits among patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), with a focus on the variation of accountable care organization (ACO) participation status for hospitals in urban and rural areas.DesignWe performed a cross-sectional study using the 2015 State Emergency Department Databases, the American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals, and the Area Health Resource File. Individual-, county-, and hospital-level characteristics and state fixed effects were used for model specification.SettingPatients with ADRD from seven states who visited the ED and had routine discharges.ParticipantsOur sample consisted of 117,196 patients with ADRD.MeasurementsThe outcome was preventable ED visits classified using the New York University Emergency Department visit algorithm. We performed a multivariable logistic regression to estimate the variation of preventable ED visits by urban and rural areas.ResultsRural patients with ADRD had 1.13 higher adjusted odds (P = .007) of going to the ED for a preventable visit compared with their urban counterparts. In addition, ACO-affiliated hospitals had .91 lower adjusted odds (P = .005) of preventable ED visits for ADRD patients compared with hospitals not affiliated with an ACO. Whole-county Mental Health Care Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) (odds ratio = 1.14; P = .002) designation was also an indicator of higher preventable ED rates.ConclusionACO delivery systems have the potential to decrease rural preventable ED visits among ADRD patients.