A survey of academic departments of emergency medicine regarding operation and clinical practice

Abstract

Study Objective: To survey academic departments of emergency medicine concerning their operation and clinical practice. Methods: A survey was mailed to the chairs of all 56 academic departments of emergency medicine in the United States requesting information concerning operations and clinical activity in budget year 1997-1998 compared with 1995-1996. These results were then compared with a similar survey conducted in the fall of 1996, examining the 1995-1996 academic year compared with the 1994-1995 academic year. Results: Forty-one (73%) academic departments of emergency medicine responded. For 1997-1998, compared with 1995-1996, 24 (59%) academic departments of emergency medicine reported an increase in emergency department patient volume; 10 (24%) reported a decrease. Twenty-four (51%) academic departments of emergency medicine reported an increase in ED patient severity, whereas 7 (15%) reported a decrease. Twenty-five (61%) academic departments of emergency medicine reported an increase in net clinical revenue for emergency medicine services, and 9 (22%) reported a decrease. Only 9 (22%) academic departments of emergency medicine reported other academic departments within their university/medical center aggressively directing patients away from the ED compared with 14 (30%) in the previous study. The percentage of academic departments of emergency medicine using midlevel providers remained essentially the same over time (68% versus 66%). In both studies, midlevel providers were used most commonly in a fast-track setting. Only 37% of academic departments of emergency medicine reported having an observation unit; staffing in all cases was by emergency physicians. Since the last survey, 38 (93%) academic departments of emergency medicine reported their medical center or hospital negotiating with managed care organizations to provide services. Unfortunately, only 41% of chairs were involved in these discussions. Between January 1, 1997, and the 1998 fall survey, 29% of academic departments of emergency medicine reported their university merging with another university system, and 19% reported such mergers being discussed. Similarly, between January 1, 1997, and fall 1998, 22% of academic departments of emergency medicine reported their institution merging with a private entity, whereas 16% reported ongoing discussions. Conclusion: Academic departments of emergency medicine have experienced some encouraging trends: an increase in ED patient volume, patient severity, and net clinical revenue during the study period. Midlevel providers continue to be used primarily in fast-track areas of EDs. An area of potential growth for academic departments of emergency medicine is observation medicine, because only one third of academic departments of emergency medicine have such a unit. Academic medical centers have experienced a significant increase in merger activity during the study period. [Counselman FL, Schafermeyer RW, Garcia R, Perina DG. A survey of academic departments of emergency medicine regarding operation and clinical practice. Ann Emerg Med. November 2000;36:446-450.]