Dataset Information

Analysis of Consistency in Emergency Department Physician Variation in Propensity for Admission Across Patient Sociodemographic Groups.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Sociodemographic disparities in health care and variation in physician practice patterns have been well documented; however, the contribution of variation in individual physician care practices to health disparities is challenging to quantify. Emergency department (ED) physicians vary in their propensity to admit patients. The consistency of this variation across sociodemographic groups may help determine whether physician-specific factors are associated with care differences between patient groups.

Objective

To estimate the consistency of ED physician admission propensities across categories of patient sex, race and ethnicity, and Medicaid enrollment.

Design, setting, and participants

This cross-sectional study analyzed Medicare fee-for-service claims for ED visits from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, in a 10% random sample of hospitals. The allocation of patients to ED physicians in the acute care setting was used to isolate physician-level variation in admission rates that reflects variation in physician decision-making. Multi-level models with physician random effects and hospital fixed effects were used to estimate the within-hospital physician variation in admission propensity for different patient sociodemographic subgroups and the covariation in these propensities between subgroups (consistency), adjusting for primary diagnosis and comorbidities.

Main outcomes and measures

Admission from the ED.

Results

The analysis included 4 567 760 ED visits involving 2 334 361 beneficiaries and 15 767 physicians in 396 EDs. The mean (SD) age of the beneficiaries was 78 (8.2) years, 2 700 661 visits (59.1%) were by women, and most patients (3 839 055 [84.1%]) were not eligible for Medicaid. Of 4 473 978 race and ethnicity reports on enrollment, 103 699 patients (2.3%) were Asian/Pacific Islander, 421 588 (9.4%) were Black, 257 422 (5.8%) were Hispanic, and 3 691 269 (82.5%) were non-Hispanic White. Within hospitals, adjusted rates of admission were higher for men (36.8%; 95% CI, 36.8%-36.9%) than for women (33.7%; 95% CI, 33.7%-33.8%); higher for non-Hispanic White (36.0%; 95% CI, 35.9%-36.0%) than for Asian/Pacific Islander (33.6%; 95% CI, 33.3%-33.9%), Black (30.2%; 95% CI, 30.0%-30.3%), or Hispanic (31.1%; 95% CI, 30.9%-31.2%) beneficiaries; and higher for beneficiaries dually enrolled in Medicaid (36.3%; 95% CI, 36.2%-36.5%) than for those who were not (34.7%; 95% CI, 34.7%-34.8%). Within hospitals, physicians varied in the percentage of patients admitted, ranging from 22.4% for physicians at the 10th percentile to 47.6% for physicians at the 90th percentile of the estimated distribution. Physician admission propensities were correlated between men and women (r = 0.99), Black and non-Hispanic White patients (r = 0.98), and patients who were dually enrolled and not dually enrolled in Medicaid (r = 0.98).

Conclusions and relevance

This cross-sectional study indicated that, although overall rates of admission differ systematically by patient sociodemographic factors, an individual physician's propensity to admit relative to other physicians appears to be applied consistently across sociodemographic groups of patients.

SUBMITTER: Khidir H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8456378 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Delayed initiation of appropriate antimicrobials is linked to higher sepsis mortality. We investigated interphysician variation in septic patients' door-to-antimicrobial time. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Emergency department of an academic medical center. SUBJECTS:Adult patients treated with antimicrobials in the emergency department between 2009 and 2015 for fluid-refractory severe sepsis or septic shock. Patients who were transferred, received antimicrobials prior to emergency department arrival, or were treated by an attending physician who cared for less than five study patients were excluded. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:We employed multivariable linear regression to evaluate the association between treating attending physician and door-to-antimicrobial time after adjustment for illness severity (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score), patient age, prehospital or arrival hypotension, admission from a long-term care facility, mode of arrival, weekend or nighttime admission, source of infection, and trainee involvement in care. Among 421 eligible patients, 74% received antimicrobials within 3 hours of emergency department arrival. After covariate adjustment, attending physicians' (n = 40) median door-to-antimicrobial times varied significantly, ranging from 71 to 359 minutes (p = 0.002). The percentage of each physician's patients whose antimicrobials began within 3 hours of emergency department arrival ranged from 0% to 100%. Overall, 12% of variability in antimicrobial timing was explained by the attending physician compared with 4% attributable to illness severity as measured by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (p < 0.001). Some but not all physicians started antimicrobials later for patients who were normotensive on presentation (p = 0.017) or who had a source of infection other than pneumonia (p = 0.006). The adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality increased by 20% for each 1 hour increase in door-to-antimicrobial time (p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with severe sepsis or septic shock receiving antimicrobials in the emergency department, door-to-antimicrobial times varied five-fold among treating physicians. Given the association between antimicrobial delay and mortality, interventions to reduce physician variation in antimicrobial initiation are likely indicated.

Project description:ImportanceEmergency department (ED) triage models are intended to queue patients for treatment. In the absence of higher acuity, patients of the same acuity should room in order of arrival.ObjectiveTo characterize disparities in ED care access as unexplained queue jumps (UQJ), or instances in which acuity and first come, first served principles are violated.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective, cross-sectional study between July 2017 and February 2020. Participants were all ED patient arrivals at 2 EDs within a large Northeast health system. Data were analyzed from July to September 2022.ExposureUQJ was defined as a patient being placed in a treatment space ahead of a patient of higher acuity or of a same acuity patient who arrived earlier.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were odds of a UQJ and association with ED outcomes of hallway placement, leaving before treatment complete, escalation to higher level of care while awaiting inpatient bed placement, and 72-hour ED revisitation. Secondary analysis examined UQJs among high acuity ED arrivals. Regression models (zero-inflated Poisson and logistic regression) adjusted for patient demographics and ED operational variables at time of triage.ResultsOf 314 763 included study visits, 170 391 (54.1%) were female, the mean (SD) age was 50.46 (20.5) years, 132 813 (42.2%) patients were non-Hispanic White, 106 401 (33.8%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 66 465 (21.1%) were Hispanic or Latino. Overall, 90 698 (28.8%) patients experienced a queue jump, and 78 127 (24.8%) and 44 551 (14.2%) patients were passed over by a patient of the same acuity or lower acuity, respectively. A total of 52 959 (16.8%) and 23 897 (7.6%) patients received care ahead of a patient of the same acuity or higher acuity, respectively. Patient demographics including Medicaid insurance (incident rate ratio [IRR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.14), Black non-Hispanic race (IRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (IRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08), and Spanish as primary language (IRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) were independent social factors associated with being passed over. The odds of a patient receiving care ahead of others were lower for ED visits by Medicare insured (odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96), Medicaid insured (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.85), Black non-Hispanic (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.97), and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.83-0.91). Patients who were passed over by someone of the same triage severity level had higher odds of hallway bed placement (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02) and leaving before disposition (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of ED patients in triage, there were consistent disparities among marginalized populations being more likely to experience a UQJ, hallway placement, and leaving without receiving treatment despite being assigned the same triage acuity as others. EDs should seek to standardize triage processes to mitigate conscious and unconscious biases that may be associated with timely access to emergency care.

Project description:ObjectivesEmergency department (ED) crowding is an increasing problem associated with adverse patient outcomes. ED expansion is one method advocated to reduce ED crowding. The objective of this analysis was to determine the effect of ED expansion on measures of ED crowding.MethodsThis was a retrospective study using administrative data from two 11-month periods before and after the expansion of an ED from 33 to 53 adult beds in an academic medical center. ED volume, staffing, and hospital admission and occupancy data were obtained either from the electronic health record (EHR) or from administrative records. The primary outcome was the rate of patients who left without being treated (LWBT), and the secondary outcome was total ED boarding time for admitted patients. A multivariable robust linear regression model was used to determine whether ED expansion was associated with the outcome measures.ResultsThe mean (±SD) daily adult volume was 128 (±14) patients before expansion and 145 (±17) patients after. The percentage of patients who LWBT was unchanged: 9.0% before expansion versus 8.3% after expansion (difference = 0.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.16% to 1.4%). Total ED boarding time increased from 160 to 180 hours/day (difference = 20 hours, 95% CI = 8 to 32 hours). After daily ED volume, low-acuity area volume, daily wait time, daily boarding hours, and nurse staffing were adjusted for, the percentage of patients who LWBT was not independently associated with ED expansion (p = 0.053). After ED admissions, ED intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, elective surgical admissions, hospital occupancy rate, ICU occupancy rate, and number of operational ICU beds were adjusted for, the increase in ED boarding hours was independently associated with the ED expansion (p = 0.005).ConclusionsAn increase in ED bed capacity was associated with no significant change in the percentage of patients who LWBT, but had an unintended consequence of an increase in ED boarding hours. ED expansion alone does not appear to be an adequate solution to ED crowding.

Project description:IntroductionLaw enforcement officers (LEO) interact with patients and clinicians in the emergency department (ED) for many reasons. There is no current consensus on what should comprise, or how to best enact, guidelines that ideally balance LEO activities in the service of public safety with patient health, autonomy, and privacy. The purpose of this study was to explore how a national sample of emergency physicians (EP) perceives activities of LEOs during the delivery of emergency medical care.MethodsMembers of the Emergency Medicine Practice Research Network (EMPRN) were recruited via an email-delivered, anonymous survey that elicited experiences, perceptions, and knowledge of policies that guide interactions with LEOs in the ED. The survey included multiple-choice items, which we analyzed descriptively, and open-ended questions, which we analyzed using qualitative content analysis.ResultsOf 765 EPs in the EMPRN, 141 (18.4%) completed the survey. Respondents represented diverse locations and years in practice. A total of 113 (82%) respondents were White, and 114 (81%) were male. Over a third reported LEO presence in the ED on a daily basis. A majority (62%) perceived LEO presence as helpful for clinicians and clinical practice. When asked about the factors deemed highly important in allowing LEOs to access patients during care, 75% reported patients' potential as a threat to public safety. A small minority of respondents (12%) considered the patients' consent or preference to interact with LEOs. While 86% of EPs felt that information-gathering by LEO was appropriate in the ED setting, only 13% were aware of policy to guide these decisions. Perceived barriers to implementation of policy in this area included: issues of enforcement; leadership; education; operational challenges; and potential negative consequences.ConclusionFuture research is warranted to explore how policies and practices that guide intersections between emergency medical care and law enforcement impact patients, clinicians, and the communities that health systems serve.