P038: Comparison of diagnostic imaging rates between workplace and non-workplace injuries in the emergency department: a ten-year review

Abstract

Background: In Canada, injuries represent 21% of Emergency Department (ED) visits. Faced with occupational injuries, physicians may feel pressured to provide urgent imaging to facilitate expedited return to work. There is not a body of literature to support this practice. Twenty percent of adult ED injuries involve workers compensation. Aim Statement: Tacit pressures were felt to impact imaging rates for patients with workplace injuries, and our aim was to determine if this hypothesis was accurate. We conducted a quality review to assess imaging rates among injuries suffered at work and outside work. A secondary aim was to reduce the harm resulting from non-value-added testing. Measures & Design: Information was collected from the Emergency Department Information System on patients with acute injuries over the age of 16-years including upper limb, lower limb, neck, back and head injuries. Data included both workplace and non-work-related presentations, Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) levels and age at presentation. Imaging included any of X-ray, CT, MRI, or Ultrasound ordered in EDs across the central zone of Nova Scotia from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2019. A total of 282,860 patient-encounters were included for analysis. Comparison was made between patients presenting under the Workers’ Compensation Board of Nova Scotia (WCB) and those covered by the Department of Health and Wellness (DOHW). Imaging rates for all injuries were also trended over this ten-year period. Evaluation/Results: In patients between 16 and 65-years, the WCB group underwent more imaging (55.3% of visits) than did the DOHW group (43.1% of visits). In the same cohort, there was an overall decrease of over 10% in mean imaging rates for both WBC and DOHW between the first five-year period (2009-2013) and the second five-year study period (2013-2018). Imaging rates for WCB and DOHW converged with each decade beyond 35 years of age. No comparison was possible beyond 85-years, due to the absence of WCB presentations. Discussion/Impact: Patients presenting to the ED with workplace injuries are imaged at a higher rate than those covered by the DOHW. Campaigns promoting value-added care may have impacted imaging rates during the ten-year study period, explaining the decline in ED imaging for all injuries. While this 10% decrease in overall imaging is encouraging, these preliminary data indicate the need for further education on resource stewardship, especially for patients presenting to the ED with workplace injuries.