The Value of Using a Quality Assurance Follow-Up Team to Address Incidental Findings After Emergency Department or Urgent Care Discharge: A Cost Analysis

Abstract

BackgroundIncidental finding (IF) follow-up is of critical importance for patient safety and is a source of malpractice risk. Laboratory, imaging, or other types of IFs are often uncovered incidentally and are missed, not addressed, or only result after hospital discharge. Despite a growing IF notification literature, a need remains to study cost-effective non–electronic health record (EHR)–specific solutions that can be used across different types of IFs and EHRs. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the utility and cost-effectiveness of an EHR-independent emergency medicine–based quality assurance (QA) follow-up program in which an experienced nurse reviewed laboratory and imaging studies and ensured appropriate follow-up of results. MethodsA QA nurse reviewed preceding-day abnormal studies from a tertiary care hospital, a community hospital, and an urgent care center. Laboratory values outside preset parameters or radiology over-reads resulting in clinically actionable changes triggered contact with an on-call emergency physician to determine an appropriate intervention and its implementation. ResultsOf 104,125 visits with 1,351,212 laboratory studies and 95,000 imaging studies, 6530 visits had IFs, including 2659 laboratory and 4004 imaging results. The most common intervention was contacting a primary care physician (5783 cases [88.6%]). Twenty-one cases resulted in a patient returning to the ED, at an average cost of $28,000 per potential life-/limb-saving intervention. ConclusionsAlthough abnormalities in laboratory results and imaging are often incidental to patient care, a dedicated emergency department QA follow-up program resulted in the identification and communication of numerous laboratory and imaging abnormalities and may result in changes to patients’ subsequent clinical course, potentially increasing patient safety.