Dataset Information

Identifying subgroups and risk among frequent emergency department users in British Columbia.

ABSTRACT: Objective: Frequent emergency department (ED) users are heterogeneous. We aimed to identify subgroups and assess their mortality. Methods: We identified patients ?18 years with ?1 ED visit in British Columbia from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015, and linked to hospitalization, physician billing, prescription, and mortality data. Frequent users were the top 10% of patients by ED visits. We employed cluster analysis to identify frequent user subgroups. We assessed 365-day mortality using Kaplan-Meier curves and conducted Cox regressions to assess mortality risk factors within subgroups. Results: We identified 4 subgroups. Subgroup 1 ("Elderly") had median age 77 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 66-85), 5 visits/year (IQR: 4-6), median 8 prescription medications (IQR: 5-11), and 24.7% mortality. Subgroup 2 ("Mental Health and Alcohol Use") had median age 48 years (IQR: 34-61), 13 visits/year (IQR: 10-16), and 12.3% mortality. They made a median 31 general practitioner visits (IQR: 19-51); however, only 23.7% received a majority of services from 1 primary care physician. Subgroup 3 ("Young Mental Health") had median age 39 years (IQR: 28-51), 5 visits/year (IQR: 4-6), and 2.2% mortality. Subgroup 4 ("Short-term") had median age 50 years (IQR: 34-65), 4 visits/year (IQR: 4-5) regularly spaced over a short term, and 1.4% mortality. Male sex (all subgroups), long-term care ("Mental Health and Alcohol Use;" "Young Mental Health"), and rural residence ("Elderly" in long-term care; "Young Mental Health") were associated with increased mortality. Conclusions: Our results identify frequent user subgroups with varying mortality. Future research should explore subgroups' unmet needs and tailor interventions toward them.

SUBMITTER: Moe J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7823092 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identifying subgroups and risk among frequent emergency department users in British Columbia.

Moe Jessica J O'Sullivan Fiona F McGregor Margaret J MJ Schull Michael J MJ Dong Kathryn K Holroyd Brian R BR Grafstein Eric E Hohl Corinne M CM Trimble Johanna J McGrail Kimberlyn M KM

Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open 20210102 1

<b>Objective</b>: Frequent emergency department (ED) users are heterogeneous. We aimed to identify subgroups and assess their mortality. <b>Methods</b>: We identified patients ≥18 years with ≥1 ED visit in British Columbia from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015, and linked to hospitalization, physician billing, prescription, and mortality data. Frequent users were the top 10% of patients by ED visits. We employed cluster analysis to identify frequent user subgroups. We assessed 365-day mortality u ...[more]

PMID: 33532752

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVisits to the emergency department are critical opportunities to engage individuals after an overdose. We sought to estimate and compare the 12-month mortality between persons with visits to the emergency department related to opioid overdose and those with non-overdose-related visits.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Provincial Overdose Cohort, which contains data for patients in British Columbia who had an opioid-related overdose between 2015 and 2017, along with a 20% random sample of BC residents for comparison. We examined all nonfatal visits to the emergency department between Jan. 1, 2015, and Dec. 31, 2016, among persons aged 14 to 74 years and compared the 12-month mortality between those with overdose-related visits and those with non-overdose-related visits. We estimated the hazard ratio for death, with adjustment for age, sex, comorbidity and disposition (discharged or left against medical advice).ResultsWe included 3593 persons with overdose-related visits and 216 453 with non-overdose-related visits to the emergency department. Those with overdose-related visits were younger, were predominantly male and had more mental health conditions. The 12-month crude mortality probability was 5.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7%-6.2%) in this group and 1.7% (95% CI 1.6%-1.8%) among those with non-overdose-related visits. After adjustment, for persons who were discharged, the 12-month mortality hazard was 3.5 (95% CI 3.0-4.2) times higher among those with overdose-related visits than those with non-overdose-related visits. For persons who left against medical advice, the mortality hazard was 7.1 (95% CI 4.0-12.5) times higher among those with opioid overdose.InterpretationAmong persons with overdose-related visits to the emergency department, 12-month mortality was higher than among those with non-overdose-related visits. Overdose-related visits should prompt urgent evidence-based interventions (e.g., take-home naloxone kits, buprenorphine-naloxone induction) to prevent future deaths.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Frequent emergency department users are patients cumulating at least four visits per year. Few studies have focused on persistent frequent users, who maintain their frequent user status for multiple consecutive years. This study targets an adult population with chronic conditions, and its aims are: 1) to estimate the prevalence of persistent frequent ED use; 2) to identify factors associated with persistent frequent ED use (frequent use for three consecutive years) and compare their importance with those associated with occasional frequent ED use (frequent use during the year following the index date); and 3) to compare characteristics of "persistent frequent users" to "occasional frequent users" and to "users other than persistent frequent users". METHODS:This is a retrospective cohort study using Quebec administrative databases. All adult patients who visited the emergency department in 2012, diagnosed with chronic conditions, and living in non-remote areas were included. Patients who died in the three years following their index date were excluded. The main outcome was persistent frequent use (≥4 visits per year during three consecutive years). Potential predictors included sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental comorbidities, and prior healthcare utilization. Odds ratios were computed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS:Out of 297,182 patients who visited ED at least once in 2012, 3,357 (1.10%) were persistent frequent users. Their main characteristics included poor socioeconomic status, mental and physical comorbidity, and substance abuse. Those characteristics were also present for occasional frequent users, although with higher percentages for the persistent user group. The number of previous visits to the emergency department was the most important factor in the regression model. The occasional frequent users' attrition rate was higher between the first and second year of follow-up than between the second and third year. CONCLUSIONS:Persistent frequent users are a subpopulation of frequent users with whom they share characteristics, such as physical and mental comorbidities, though the former are poorer and younger. More research is needed in order to better understand what factors can contribute to persistent frequent use.

Project description:ObjectivesMany interventions have been developed over the years to offer frequent users of the emergency department (FUEDs) better access to quality coordinated healthcare. Despite recognising the role primary care physicians (PCPs) play in FUEDs' care, to date their perceptions of case management, the most studied intervention, have rarely been assessed. Furthermore, a gap regarding PCPs' experience of caring for FUEDs persists. Thus, this study aimed to explore PCPs' perceptions of the care provided to FUEDs in emergency and primary care settings, their views on the local case management team (CMT), and their suggestions to improve FUEDs' care.DesignQualitative study using in-depth semistructured interviews and inductive thematic analysis.SettingCanton of Vaud, Switzerland.ParticipantsThirty PCPs participated, 16 in private practice (PP-PCPs) and 14 based at the Lausanne University Centre of General Medicine and Public Health (Unisanté-U-PCPs).ResultsU-PCPs and PP-PCPs thought that most FUEDs' emergency department (ED) visits were legitimate, but questioned ED adequacy to meet FUEDs' needs. Yet, both PCP groups reported encountering many challenges in FUEDs' care themselves. In this context, PP-PCPs seemed more satisfied of the care they provided to FUEDs than U-PCPs. Generally, U-PCPs seemed to find more value in the CMT to help them care for FUEDs than PP-PCPs. To enhance FUEDs' care, U-PCPs and PP-PCPs suggested enhancing collaboration with other healthcare providers. U-PCPs also wished to increase their availability, and some PP-PCPs considered outpatient clinics, larger group practices or medical centres most appropriate to handle FUEDs' needs.ConclusionsThis study highlights the many challenges PCPs face in caring for FUEDs, that a CM intervention has the potential to mitigate, and provides ways forward in improving FUEDs' care, including reinforced communication with the CMT and ED physicians, and structural changes to their own way of delivering care to FUEDs.

Project description:We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients' emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers.We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient's allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N?=?125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N?=?125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient's satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later.Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01934322.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies have shown reductions in the volume of emergency department visits early in the COVID-19 pandemic, but few have evaluated the pandemic's impact over time or stratified analyses by reason for visits. We aimed to quantify such changes in British Columbia, Canada, cumulatively and during prominent nadirs, and by reason for visit, age and acuity.MethodsWe included data from the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System for 30 emergency departments across BC from January 2016 to December 2022. We fitted generalized additive models, accounting for seasonal and annual trends, to the monthly number of visits to estimate changes throughout the pandemic, compared with the expected number of visits in the absence of the pandemic. We determined absolute and relative differences at various times during the study period, and cumulatively since the start of the pandemic until the overall volume of emergency department visits returned to expected levels.ResultsOver the first 16 months of the pandemic, the volume of emergency department visits was reduced by about 322 300 visits, or 15% (95% confidence interval 12%-18%), compared with the expected volume. A sharp drop in pediatric visits accounted for nearly one-third of the reduction. The timing of the return to baseline volume of visits differed by subgroup. The largest and most sustained decreases were in respiratory-related emergency department visits, visits among children, visits among oldest adults and non-urgent visits. Later in the pandemic, we observed increased volumes of highest-urgency visits, visits among children and visits related to ear, nose and throat.InterpretationWe have extended evidence that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated mitigation strategies on emergency department visits in Canada was substantial. Both our findings and methods are relevant in public health surveillance and capacity planning for emergency departments in pandemic and nonpandemic times.

Dataset Information

Identifying subgroups and risk among frequent emergency department users in British Columbia.

Publications

Identifying subgroups and risk among frequent emergency department users in British Columbia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets