Abstract

IntroductionThe 72-hour unscheduled return visit (URV) of an emergency department (ED) patient is often used as a key performance indicator in emergency medicine. We sought to determine if URVs with admission to hospital (URVA) represent a distinct subgroup compared to unscheduled return visits with no admission (URVNA).MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of all 72-hour URVs in adults across 10 EDs in the Edmonton Zone (EZ) over a one-year period (January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015) using ED information-system data. URVA and URVNA populations were compared, and a multivariable analysis identified predictors of URVA.ResultsAnalysis of 40,870 total URV records, including 3,363 URVAs, revealed predictors of URVA on the index visit including older age (>65 yrs, odds ratio [OR] 3.6), higher disease acuity (Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale [CTAS] 2, OR 2.6), gastrointestinal presenting complaint (OR 2.2), presenting to a referral hospital (OR 1.4), fewer annual ED visits (<4 visits, OR 2.0), and more hours spent in the ED (>12 hours, OR 2.0). A decrease in CTAS score (increase in disease acuity) upon return visit also increased the risk of admission (−1 CTAS level, OR 2.6). ED crowding at the index visit, as indicated by occupancy level, was not a predictor.ConclusionWe demonstrate that URVA patients comprise a distinct subgroup of 72-hour URV patients. Risk factors for URVA are present at the index visit suggesting that patients at high risk for URVA may be identifiable prior to admission.

Highlights

  • The 72-hour unscheduled return visit (URV) of an emergency department (ED) patient is often used as a key performance indicator in emergency medicine

  • We sought to determine if URVs with admission to hospital (URVA) represent a distinct subgroup compared to unscheduled return visits with no admission (URVNA)

  • Analysis of 40,870 total URV records, including 3,363 URVAs, revealed predictors of URVA on the index visit including older age (>65 yrs, odds ratio [OR] 3.6), higher disease acuity (Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale [Canadian Triage and Acuity Score (CTAS)] 2, OR 2.6), gastrointestinal presenting complaint, presenting to a referral hospital, fewer annual ED visits (12 hours, OR 2.0)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The 72-hour unscheduled return visit (URV) of an emergency department (ED) patient is often used as a key performance indicator in emergency medicine. Several quality measures have been proposed and employed in emergency medicine including the number of patients who leave without being seen, ambulance diversion times, total length of stay, and the time delay from a patient’s arrival until being seen by a provider.[1] This paper explores another performance metric – the unscheduled return visit (URV). Multi-hospital, quality improvement programs have used 72-hour URVs to monitor for adverse events and medical error.[2] in the inpatient setting reimbursement and accreditation programs may penalize hospitals for high rates of readmission for Predictors of Admission in Adult Unscheduled Return Visits to the ED certain medical conditions.[3] The assumption underlying such surveillance is that the URV represents a potentially avoidable event and may be associated with unsafe or ineffective care. Chart reviews lend support to this idea, revealing links between URVs and missed diagnoses, premature discharge, and inadequate discharge instructions in the ED.[4,5,6,7]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.