Dataset Information

False negative point-of-care urine pregnancy tests in an urban academic emergency department: a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Study objective

To determine the prevalence of false negative point-of-care (POC) urine pregnancy tests among emergency department (ED) patients and among those with abdominal pain or vaginal bleeding.

Methods

We identified all female patients, ages 14-50 years without prior hysterectomy who had a negative POC urine pregnancy test (beta subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin [β-hCG]) performed by trained clinical staff in the ED between September 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018, as well as a subgroup we defined a priori as "high risk" for early pregnancy complications based on a triage chief complaint (text) of abdominal pain or vaginal bleeding. We identified those with a positive urine β-hCG, serum β-hCG >5 mIU/mL, or a diagnosis of pregnancy within 3 months of the initial ED visit (index visit). We used structured chart review with American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology guidelines to determine pregnancy diagnosis and outcomes (ectopic, intrauterine, abnormal including spontaneous abortion, and unknown), the date of conception, and whether the pregnancy was present at the index visit.

Results

Of 10,924 visits with a negative urine pregnancy test result that were screened for a pregnancy outcome, 171 (1.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4, 1.8) had a pregnancy present at the index visit. Diagnoses were ectopic (n = 12, 7.0%), intrauterine (n = 71, 41.5%), abnormal (n = 77, 45.0%), and unknown (n = 11, 6.4%). Of the 2732 patients with high-risk complaints, 97 (3.6%, 95% CI = 2.9, 4.3) had a pregnancy present at the index visit (relative risk of a pregnancy diagnosis 3.9, 95% CI = 2.9,5.3), including 10/12 ectopic (83%), 58/77 abnormal (75%), and 25/71 intrauterine pregnancies (35%). Serum β-hCG ranged from 2 mIU/mL to above assay (median = 119.5, interquartile range = 957.5).

Conclusion

Although false negative urine pregnancy tests were uncommon, multiple pregnancy diagnoses were missed, including ectopic pregnancies. False negatives were more common among patients with abdominal pain or vaginal bleeding. Concurrent serum β-hCG levels demonstrated a broad distribution.

SUBMITTER: Kleinschmidt S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8087939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has critically affected healthcare delivery in the United States. Little is known on its impact on the utilization of emergency department (ED) services, particularly for conditions that might be medically urgent. The objective of this study was to explore trends in the number of outpatient (treat and release) ED visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study of outpatient emergency department visits from January 1, 2019 to August 31, 2020 using data from a large, urban, academic hospital system in Utah. Using weekly counts and trend analyses, we explored changes in overall ED visits, by patients' area of residence, by medical urgency, and by specific medical conditions.ResultsWhile outpatient ED visits were higher (+6.0%) in the first trimester of 2020 relative to the same period in 2019, the overall volume between January and August of 2020 was lower (-8.1%) than in 2019. The largest decrease occurred in April 2020 (-30.4%), followed by the May to August period (-12.8%). The largest declines were observed for visits by out-of-state residents, visits classified as non-emergent, primary care treatable or preventable, and for patients diagnosed with hypertension, diabetes, headaches and migraines, mood and personality disorders, fluid and electrolyte disorders, and abdominal pain. Outpatient ED visits for emergent conditions, such as palpitations and tachycardia, open wounds, syncope and collapse remained relatively unchanged, while lower respiratory disease-related visits were 67.5% higher in 2020 relative to 2019, particularly from March to April 2020. However, almost all types of outpatient ED visits bounced back after May 2020.ConclusionsOverall outpatient ED visits declined from mid-March to August 2020, particularly for non-medically urgent conditions which can be treated in other more appropriate care settings. Our findings also have implications for insurers, policymakers, and other stakeholders seeking to assist patients in choosing more appropriate setting for their care during and after the pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundAcademic and non-academic emergency departments (EDs) are regularly compared in clinical operations benchmarking despite suggestion that the two groups may differ in their clinical operations characteristics. and outcomes. We sought to describe and compare clinical operations characteristics of academic versus non-academic EDs.MethodsWe performed a descriptive, comparative analysis of academic and non-academic adult and general EDs with 40,000+ annual encounters, using the Academy of Academic Administrators of Emergency Medicine (AAAEM)/Association of Academic Chairs of Emergency Medicine (AACEM) and Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA) survey results. We defined academic EDs as primary teaching sites for emergency medicine (EM) residencies and non-academic EDs as sites with minimal resident involvement. We constructed the academic and non-academic cohorts from the AAAEM/AACEM and EDBA surveys, respectively, and analyzed metrics common to both surveys.ResultsEighty and 454 EDs met inclusion criteria for academic and non-academic EDs, respectively. Academic EDs had more median annual patient encounters (73,001 vs 54,393), lower median proportion of pediatric patients (6.3% vs 14.5%), higher median proportion of EMS patients (27% vs 19%), and were more commonly designated as Level I or II Trauma Centers (94% vs 24%). Median patient arrival-to-provider times did not differ (26 vs 25?min). Median length-of-stay was longer (277 vs 190?min) for academic EDs, and left-before-treatment-complete was higher (5.7% vs 2.9%). MRI utilization was higher for academic EDs (2.2% patients with at least one MRI vs 1.0 MRIs performed per 100 patients). Patients-per-hour of provider coverage was lower for academic EDs with and without consideration for advanced practice providers and residents.ConclusionsDemographic and operational performance measures differ between academic and non-academic EDs, suggesting that the two groups may be inappropriate operational performance comparators. Causes for the differences remain unclear but the differences appear not to be attributed solely to the academic mission.