The cost effectiveness of early assessment and intervention by a dedicated health and social care professional team for older adults in the emergency department compared to treatment-as-usual: Economic evaluation of the OPTI-MEND trial.

BACKGROUND: Over 65s are frequent attenders to the Emergency Department (ED) and more than half are admitted for overnight stays. Early assessment and intervention by a dedicated ED-based Health and Social Care Professionals (HSCP) team reduces ED length of stay and the risk of hospital admissions among older adults while improving patient health-related quality-of-life and satisfaction with care. This study aims to evaluate whether augmenting the treatment as usual for older adults admitted to ED is cost-effective. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), conducted alongside the OPTI-MEND randomised controlled trial of 353 patients aged ≥65 with lower urgency complaints compared the effectiveness of early assessment and intervention by a dedicated HSCP team in the ED to treatment as usual (TAU). An economic analysis estimated the average cost per older adults randomised to the HSCP team, and compared to TAU, how contact with HSCP team changed health care use, and associated total costs, and estimated the effect of HSCP on Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Within the OPTI-MEND trial, the average cost of a contact with the HSCP team during ED attendance is estimated to be €801 per patient. Compared to TAU, the incremental QALY of intervention is 0.053 (95% CI: 0.023 to 0.0826, p<0.0001). Accounting for cost savings because of contact with HSCP team, the average incremental saving in the total cost, compared to TAU, is -€6,128 (95% CI: -€9,217 to -€3,038, p<0.0001). Given the incremental health gains and significant cost savings, bootstrapped cost CEA suggests that dedicated HSCP care dominates over TAU for low urgency older adults attending the ED. CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated HSCP team in the ED significantly improves overall health for lower acuity older adults and, by reducing inpatient length of stay, results in staggering cost savings. This economic evaluation conducted on the OPTI-MEND trial provides convincing evidence that HSCP should be adopted as part of treatment as usual in Irish EDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03739515; registered on 12th November 2018. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03739515.

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Cohort Study of Process, Clinical, and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Background: This study aimed to explore the process, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes of older adults who received an interdisciplinary Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) in the emergency department (ED) over a six-month period after their initial ED attendance. Patients and Methods: A prospective cohort study recruited older adults aged ≥65 years who presented to the ED of a university teaching hospital in Ireland. Baseline assessment data comprising a battery of demographic variables and validated indices were obtained at the index ED attendance. Telephone interviews were completed with participants at 30- and 180-day follow-up. The primary outcome was incidence of hospital admission following the index ED attendance. Secondary outcomes included participant satisfaction, incidence of functional decline, health-related quality of life, incidence of unscheduled ED re-attendance(s), hospital (re)admission(s), nursing home admission, and death. Results: A total of 133 participants (mean age 82.43 years, standard deviation = 6.89 years; 71.4% female) were recruited; 21.8% of the cohort were admitted to hospital following the index ED attendance with a significant decline in function reported at hospital discharge (Z = 2.97, p = 0.003). Incidence of 30- and 180-day unscheduled ED re-attendance was 10.5% and 24.8%, respectively. The outcome at the index ED attendance was a significant predictor of adverse outcomes whereby those who were discharged home had significantly lower odds of multiple adverse process outcomes at 30- and 180-day follow-up, and significantly higher function and health-related quality of life at 30-day follow-up. Conclusion: While this study was observational in nature, findings suggest CGA in the ED may improve outcomes by mitigating against the adverse effects of potentially avoidable hospital admissions and focusing on a longitudinal approach to healthcare delivery at the primary-secondary care interface. Future research should be underpinned by an experimental study design to address key limitations in this study.

Clinician consensus on "Inappropriate" presentations to the Emergency Department in the Better Data, Better Planning (BDBP) census: a cross-sectional multi-centre study of emergency department utilisation in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Utilisation of the Emergency Department (ED) for non-urgent care increases demand for services, therefore reducing inappropriate or avoidable attendances is an important area for intervention in prevention of ED crowding. This study aims to develop a consensus between clinicians across care settings about the "appropriateness" of attendances to the ED in Ireland. METHODS: The Better Data, Better Planning study was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study investigating factors influencing ED utilisation in Ireland. Data was compiled in patient summary files which were assessed for measures of appropriateness by an academic General Practitioner (GP) and academic Emergency Medicine Consultant (EMC) National Panel. In cases where consensus was not reached charts were assessed by an Independent Review Panel (IRP). At each site all files were autonomously assessed by local GP-EMC panels. RESULTS: The National Panel determined that 11% (GP) to 38% (EMC) of n = 306 lower acuity presentations could be treated by a GP within 24-48 h (k = 0.259; p < 0.001) and that 18% (GP) to 35% (EMC) of attendances could be considered "inappropriate" (k = 0.341; p < 0.001). For attendances deemed "appropriate" the admission rate was 47% compared to 0% for "inappropriate" attendees. There was no consensus on 45% of charts (n = 136). Subset analysis by the IRP determined that consensus for appropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 59% and for inappropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 29%. For the Local Panel review (n = 306) consensus on appropriateness ranged from 40 to 76% across ED sites. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary clinicians agree that "inappropriate" use of the ED in Ireland is an issue. However, obtaining consensus on appropriateness of attendance is challenging and there was a significant cohort of complex heterogenous presentations where agreement could not be reached by clinicians in this study. This research again demonstrates the complexity of ED crowding, the introduction of evidence-based care pathways targeting avoidable presentations may serve to alleviate the problem in our EDs.

Screening instruments to predict adverse outcomes for undifferentiated older adults attending the Emergency Department: Results of SOAED prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: frailty screening facilitates the stratification of older adults at most risk of adverse events for urgent assessment and subsequent intervention. We assessed the validity of the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Programme on Research for Integrating Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy seven item questionnaire (PRISMA-7) and InterRAI-ED at predicting adverse outcomes at 30 days and 6 months amongst older adults presenting to the Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: a prospective cohort study of adults ≥65 years who presented to the ED was conducted. The ISAR, CFS, PRISMA-7 and InterRAI-ED were assessed. Blinded follow-up telephone interviews were completed at 30 days and 6 months to assess the incidence of mortality, ED re-attendance, hospital readmission, functional decline and nursing home admission. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of the screening tools were calculated using 2 × 2 tables. RESULTS: a total of 419 patients were recruited; 47% female with a mean age of 76.9 (Standard deviation = 7.2). The prevalence of frailty varied across the tools (CFS 57% versus InterRAI-ED 70%). At 30 days, the mortality rate was 5.1%, ED re-attendance 18.1%, hospital readmission 14%, functional decline 47.6% and nursing home admission 7.1%. All tools had a high sensitivity and positive predictive value for predicting adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: older adults who screened positive for frailty were at significantly increased risk of experiencing an adverse outcome at 30 days with the ISAR being the most sensitive tool. We would recommend the implementation of the ISAR in the ED setting to support clinicians in identifying older adults most likely to benefit from specialised geriatric assessment and intervention.

Are we there yet?' Distance to definitive care for Irish patients in the Better Data, Better Planning (BDBP) study.

BACKGROUND: Residing long distances from definitive care compromises patient safety and, in rural Ireland, travel distance to health care can be substantial, particularly in light of national General Practitioner (GP) shortages and hospital reconfigurations. The aim of this research is to describe the profile of patients attending Irish Emergency Departments (EDs) in terms of distance from GP care and definitive care in the ED. METHOD: The 'Better Data, Better Planning' (BDBP) census was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study of n=5 urban and rural EDs in Ireland throughout 2020. At each site, all adults presenting over a 24-h census period were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected on demographics, healthcare utilisation, service awareness and factors influencing the decision to attend the ED, with analysis in SPSS. RESULTS: For n=306 participants, median distance to a GP was 3 km (range 1-100 km) and median distance to the ED was 15 km (range 1-160km). Most participants (n=167, 58%) lived within 5 km of their GP and within 10 km of the ED (n=114, 38%). However, 8% of patients lived ≥15 km from their GP and 9% of patients lived ≥50 km from their nearest ED. Patients living >50 km from the ED were more likely to be transported by Ambulance (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Proximity to health services, by geographical location, is poorer in rural regions, so it's important that these patients have equity of access to definitive care. Therefore, expansion of alternative care pathways in the community and additional resourcing of the National Ambulance Service with enhanced aeromedical support is essential in the future.

The impact of COVID-19 on an Irish Emergency Department (ED): a cross-sectional study exploring the factors influencing ED utilisation prior to and during the pandemic from the patient perspective.

BACKGROUND: The collateral damage of SARS-CoV-2 is a serious concern in the Emergency Medicine (EM) community, specifically in relation to delayed care increasing morbidity and mortality in attendances unrelated to COVID-19. The objectives of this study are to describe the profile of patients attending an Irish ED prior to, and during the pandemic, and to investigate the factors influencing ED utilisation in this cohort. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study with recruitment at three time-points prior to the onset of COVID-19 in December 2019 (n = 47) and February 2020 (n = 57) and post-Lockdown 1 in July 2020 (n = 70). At each time-point all adults presenting over a 24 h period were eligible for inclusion. Clinical data were collected via electronic records and a questionnaire provided information on demographics, healthcare utilisation, service awareness and factors influencing the decision to attend the ED. Data analysis was performed in SPSS and included descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: The demographic and clinical profile of patients across time-points was comparable in terms of age (p = 0.904), gender (p = 0.584) and presenting complaint (p = 0.556). Median length of stay in the ED decreased from 7.25 h (IQR 4.18-11.22) in February to 3.86 h (IQR 0.41-9.14) in July (p ≤ 0.005) and differences were observed in disposition (p ≤ 0.001). COVID-19 influenced decision to attend the ED for 31% of patients with 9% delaying presentation. Post-lockdown, patients were less likely to attend the ED for reassurance (p ≤ 0.005), for a second opinion (p ≤ 0.005) or to see a specialist (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Demographic and clinical presentations of ED patients prior to the first COVID-19 lockdown and during the reopening phase were comparable, however, COVID-19 significantly impacted health-seeking behaviour and operational metrics in the ED at this phase of the pandemic. These findings provide useful information for hospitals with regard to pandemic preparedness and also have wider implications for planning of future health service delivery.

The "better data, better planning" census: a cross-sectional, multi-centre study investigating the factors influencing patient attendance at the emergency department in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Internationally Emergency Department (ED) crowding is a significant health services delivery issue posing a major risk to population health. ED crowding affects both the quality and access of health services and is associated with poorer patient outcomes and increased mortality rates. In Ireland the practising of "Corridor Medicine" and "Trolley Crises" have become prevalent. The objectives of this study are to describe the demographic and clinical profile of patients attending regional EDs and to investigate the factors influencing ED utilisation in Ireland. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study and recruitment occurred at a selection of urban and rural EDs (n = 5) in Ireland throughout 2020. At each site all adults presenting over a 24 h census period were eligible for inclusion. Clinical data were collected via electronic records and a questionnaire provided information on demographics, healthcare utilisation, service awareness and factors influencing the decision to attend the ED. RESULTS: Demographics differed significantly between ED sites in terms of age (p ≤ 0.05), socioeconomic status (p ≤ 0.001), and proximity of health services (p ≤ 0.001). Prior to ED attendance 64% of participants accessed community health services. Most participants (70%) believed the ED was the "best place" for emergency care or attended due to lack of awareness of other services (30%). Musculoskeletal injuries were the most common reason for presentation to the ED in this study (24%) and almost a third of patients (31%) reported presenting to the ED for an x-ray or scan. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified regional and socioeconomic differences in the drivers of ED presentations and factors influencing ED attendance in Ireland from the patient perspective. Improved awareness of, and provision of alternative care pathways could potentially decrease ED attendances, which would be important in the context of reducing ED crowding during the COVID-19 pandemic. New strategies for integration of acute care in the community must acknowledge and plan for these issues as a universal approach is unlikely to be implemented successfully due to regional factors.

The impact of frailty Screening of Older adults with muLtidisciplinary assessment of those At Risk during emergency hospital attendance on the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of care (SOLAR): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Older people account for 25% of all Emergency Department (ED) admissions. This is expected to rise with an ageing demographic. Older people often present to the ED with complex medical needs in the setting of multiple comorbidities. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) has been shown to improve outcomes in an inpatient setting but clear evidence of benefit in the ED setting has not been established. It is not feasible to offer this resource-intensive assessment to all older adults in a timely fashion. Screening tools for frailty have been used to identify those at most risk for adverse outcomes following ED visit. The overall aim of this study is to examine the impact of CGA on the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of care in an undifferentiated population of frail older people with medical complaints who present to the ED and Acute Medical Assessment Unit. METHODS: This will be a parallel 1:1 allocation randomised control trial. All patients who are ≥ 75 years will be screened for frailty using the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) tool. Those with a score of ≥ 2 on the ISAR will be randomised. The treatment arm will undergo geriatric medicine team-led CGA in the ED or Acute Medical Assessment Unit whereas the non-treatment arm will undergo usual patient care. A dedicated multidisciplinary team of a specialist geriatric medicine doctor, senior physiotherapist, specialist nurse, pharmacist, senior occupational therapist and senior medical social worker will carry out the assessment, as well as interventions that arise from that assessment. Primary outcomes will be the length of stay in the ED or Acute Medical Assessment Unit. Secondary outcomes will include ED re-attendance, re-hospitalisation, functional decline, quality of life and mortality at 30 days and 180 days. These will be determined by telephone consultation and electronic records by a research nurse blinded to group allocation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Service Executive (HSE) Mid-Western Regional Hospital Research Ethics Committee (088/2020). Our lay dissemination strategy will be developed in collaboration with our Patient and Public Involvement stakeholder panel of older people at the Ageing Research Centre and we will present our findings in peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04629690 . Registered on November 16, 2020.

Impact of assessment and intervention by a health and social care professional team in the emergency department on the quality, safety, and clinical effectiveness of care for older adults: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Older adults frequently attend the emergency department (ED) and experience high rates of adverse events following ED presentation. This randomised controlled trial evaluated the impact of early assessment and intervention by a dedicated team of health and social care professionals (HSCPs) in the ED on the quality, safety, and clinical effectiveness of care of older adults in the ED. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This single-site randomised controlled trial included a sample of 353 patients aged ≥65 years (mean age = 79.6, SD = 7.01; 59.2% female) who presented with lower urgency complaints to the ED a university hospital in the Mid-West region of Ireland, during HSCP operational hours. The intervention consisted of early assessment and intervention carried out by a HSCP team comprising a senior medical social worker, senior occupational therapist, and senior physiotherapist. The primary outcome was ED length of stay. Secondary outcomes included rates of hospital admissions from the ED; hospital length of stay for admitted patients; patient satisfaction with index visit; ED revisits, mortality, nursing home admission, and unscheduled hospital admission at 30-day and 6-month follow-up; and patient functional status and quality of life (at index visit and follow-up). Demographic information included the patient's gender, age, marital status, residential status, mode of arrival to the ED, source of referral, index complaint, triage category, falls, and hospitalisation history. Participants in the intervention group (n = 176) experienced a significantly shorter ED stay than the control group (n = 177) (6.4 versus 12.1 median hours, p < 0.001). Other significant differences (intervention versus control) included lower rates of hospital admissions from the ED (19.3% versus 55.9%, p < 0.001), higher levels of satisfaction with the ED visit (p = 0.008), better function at 30-day (p = 0.01) and 6-month follow-up (p = 0.03), better mobility (p = 0.02 at 30 days), and better self-care (p = 0.03 at 30 days; p = 0.009 at 6 months). No differences at follow-up were observed in terms of ED re-presentation or hospital admission. Study limitations include the inability to blind patients or ED staff to allocation due to the nature of the intervention, and a focus on early assessment and intervention in the ED rather than care integration following discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Early assessment and intervention by a dedicated ED-based HSCP team reduced ED length of stay and the risk of hospital admissions among older adults, as well as improving patient satisfaction. Our findings support the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary model of care for key ED outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03739515; registered on 12 November 2018.

A randomised controlled trial exploring the impact of a dedicated health and social care professionals team in the emergency department on the quality, safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness of care for older adults: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Older people are frequent emergency department (ED) users who present with complex issues that are linked to poorer health outcomes following the index visit, often have increased ED length of stay, and tend to have raised healthcare costs. Encouraging evidence suggests that ED teams involving health and social care professionals (HSCPs) can contribute to enhanced patient flow and an improved patient experience by improving care decision-making and thus promoting timely and effective care. However, the evidence supporting the impact of HSCP teams assessing and intervening with older adults in the ED is limited and identifies important methodological limitations, highlighting the need for more robust and comprehensive investigations of this model of care. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a dedicated ED-based HSCP team on the quality, safety, and clinical- and cost-effectiveness of care of older adults when compared with usual care. METHODS: The study is a single-site randomised controlled trial whereby patients aged ≥65 years who present to the ED of a large Irish hospital will be randomised to the experimental group (ED-based HSCP assessment and intervention) or the control group (usual ED care). The recruitment target is 320 participants. The HSCP team will provide a comprehensive functional assessment as well as interventions to promote a safe discharge for the patient. The primary outcome is ED length of stay (from arrival to discharge). Secondary outcomes include: rates of hospital admissions from the ED, ED re-visits, unplanned hospital admissions and healthcare utilisation at 30 days, and 4 and 6 months of follow-up; patient functional status and quality of life (at baseline and follow-up); patient satisfaction; cost-effectiveness in terms of costs associated with ED-based HSCP compared with usual care; and perceptions on implementation by ED staff members. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomised controlled trial testing the impact of HSCPs working in teams in the ED on the quality, safety, and clinical- and cost-effectiveness of care for older patients. The findings of this study will provide important information on the effectiveness of this model of care for future implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03739515 . Registered on 12 November 2018.