Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Acad Emerg Med ; 11(12): 1302-10, 2004 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15576521

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Nonurgent (NU) emergency department (ED) use is at the forefront of medico-political agendas, and diversion of NU patients has been entertained as a management strategy. Before policy changes are implemented, this population should be better understood with respect to their characteristics and reasons for not presenting to primary care providers (PCPs) instead of EDs. This study compares NU with urgent and semiurgent (USU) patients and describes the NU patients' reasons for not seeking care with a PCP before presenting to the ED. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis from a cross-sectional study with sequential sampling in the EDs of five Quebec tertiary care hospitals (October 19, 1999, to May 26, 2000). Data on medical history, social support, awareness and utilization of health care, ED visits, referrals, activities of daily living, and sociodemographics were obtained. The NU group included patients with triage code 5 and the USU group included patients with triage codes 2, 3, and 4 using the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale. Patient characteristics were structured into the Andersen behavioral model for health care utilization. RESULTS: Of 2,348 patients approached, 1,783 patients (77%) were eligible and agreed to participate. NU patients (n = 454) were younger than USU patients (n = 1,329) (mean age, 43 [SD +/- 18.1] vs. 49 [SD +/- 20.1] years). Patients in the NU group had better health (number of prior conditions, 3.1 vs. 3.9), were less likely to arrive by ambulance (5% vs. 22%), and were less often admitted from the ED (4% vs. 24%). While 70% of NU compared with 75% of USU patients were followed up by a PCP, only 22% of NU and 27% of USU patients sought PCP care before presenting to the ED. The reasons given by NU patients for not seeking PCP care were accessibility (32%), perception of need (22%), referral/follow-up to the ED (20%), familiarity with the ED (11%), trust of the ED (7%), and no reason (7%). CONCLUSIONS: NU ED patients are different from USU patients and have multiple reasons for not seeking primary care before going to the ED. This may help explain why various diversion strategies have been unsuccessful and indicate that a multifaceted approach may be better suited to this group of patients. The design of new interventions, however, will benefit from further research that clarifies the impact of NU patients on the health care system.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Atención Primaria de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Quebec , Listas de Espera
2.
Acad Emerg Med ; 11(3): 312-5, 2004 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15001417

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To determine how ambulance transportation is associated with resource use in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A retrospective administrative database review of patient visits to a Montreal tertiary care hospital ED in one year (April 2000-March 2001). Measures of resource use included ED length of stay, admission to the hospital, and whether consultations and radiology/imaging tests (excluding plain-film x-rays) were ordered from the ED. RESULTS: During the study period, 39,674 patients made 59,142 visits to the ED. Ambulance transportation was used for 15.6% of these ED visits. Compared with non-ambulance visits, ambulance visits were more likely to be made by older patients (mean age: 68 vs. 47 years), to be made by females (59% vs. 55%), to have a greater triage urgency score (mean on 1-5 scale, with 1 most urgent: 2.7 vs. 3.9), and to occur after office hours, 5 PM to 9 AM (47% vs. 43%). Ambulance visits were also more likely than non-ambulance visits to result in: a longer length of stay (mean: 13.3 hours [95% CI = 13.0 to 13.6] vs. 5.9 [95% CI = 5.8 to 6.0]), hospital admission (40% vs. 10%) (odds ratio [OR]: 5.94 [95% CI = 5.59 to 6.33]), consultations (56% vs. 20%) (OR: 5.15 [95% = 4.86 to 5.45]), and radiology/imaging tests (20% vs. 12%) (OR: 1.93 [95% CI = 1.81 to 2.07]). In multivariate models that adjusted for the effects of age, gender, triage urgency, and temporal factors, ambulance transportation maintained its association with greater resource use. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study indicates that patients arriving at the ED by ambulance use significantly more resources than their walk-in counterparts.


Asunto(s)
Ambulancias/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Diagnóstico por Imagen/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Quebec , Estudios Retrospectivos , Distribución por Sexo , Triaje/estadística & datos numéricos , Revisión de Utilización de Recursos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA