RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the impact of an emergency psychiatric assessment, treatment, and healing (EmPATH) unit on emergency department (ED) revenue, psychiatric boarding time, and length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after economic evaluation of a single academic midwestern ED (60,000 annual visits) for all adult (≥18 years) patients before (December 2017-May 2018) and after (December 2018-May 2019) opening an EmPATH unit. These are outpatient hospital-based programs that provide emergent treatment and stabilization for mental health emergencies from ED patients. The Holt-Winters method was used to forecast pre-EmPATH expected ED levels of patients leaving without being seen, leaving against medical advice, eloping, or being transferred using 3 years of ED visits. ED revenues were calculated by finding the difference of pre-EmPATH expected and post-EmPATH observed values and multiplying by the revenue per visit. ED boarding time and LOS were obtained from the hospital's electronic medical record. RESULTS: There were 23,231 and 23,336 ED visits evaluated during the pre- and post-EmPATH unit periods. The ED generated an estimated additional $404,954 in the 6 months and $861,065 annually after the implementation of the EmPATH unit. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) psychiatric boarding time decreased from 212 (119-536) minutes to 152 (86-307) minutes (mean difference = 189 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 150 to 228 minutes) and median (IQR) LOS decreased from 351 (204-631) minutes to 334 (212-517) minutes (mean difference = 114 minutes, 95% CI = 87 to 143 minutes). CONCLUSION: The EmPATH unit had a positive impact on ED revenue and decreased ED boarding time and LOS for psychiatric patients.
Assuntos
Emergências , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Adulto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/economia , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sepsis severity of illness is challenging to measure using claims, which makes sepsis difficult to study using administrative data. We hypothesized that emergency department (ED) charges may be associated with hospital mortality, and could be a surrogate marker of severity of illness for research purposes. The objective of this study was to measure concordance between ED charges and mortality in admitted patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. METHODS: Cohort study of all adult patients presenting to a 60,000-visit Midwestern academic ED with severe sepsis or septic shock (by ICD-9 codes) between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2010. Data on demographics, admission APACHE-II score, and disposition was extracted from the medical record, and comorbidities were identified from diagnosis codes using the Elixhauser methodology. Summary statistics were reported and bivariate concordance was tested using Pearson correlation. Logistic regression models for 28-day mortality were developed to measure the independent association with mortality. RESULTS: We included a total of 294 patients in the analysis. We found that ED charges were inversely related to mortality (adjusted OR 0.829 per $1000 increase in total ED charges, 95%CI 0.702-0.980). ED charges were also independently associated with 28-day hospital-free and ICU-free days (0.74 days increase per $1000 additional ED charges, 95%CI 0.06-1.41 and 0.81 days increase per $1000 additional ED charges, 95%CI 0.05-1.56, respectively). ED charges were also associated with APACHE-II score ($34 total ED charges per point increase in APACHE-II score, 95%CI $6-62). CONCLUSIONS: ED charges in administrative data sets are associated with in-hospital mortality and health care utilization, likely related to both illness severity and intensity of early sepsis resuscitation. ED charges may have a role in risk adjustment models using administrative data for acute care research.