Value-based comparison of ambulatory children with respiratory diseases in an emergency department and a walk-in clinic: a retrospective cohort study in Québec, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To compare health outcomes and costs given in the emergency department (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory children presenting with acute respiratory diseases. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: This study was conducted from April 2016 to March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. The ED is a paediatric tertiary care centre, and the clinic has access to lab tests and X-rays. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were children: (1) aged from 2 to 17 years old and (2) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia or acute asthma. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or clinic within 3 and 7 days of the index visit. The secondary outcome measures were the mean cost of care estimated using time-driven activity-based costing and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients. RESULTS: We included 532 children seen in the ED and 201 seen in the walk-in clinic. The incidence of return visits at 3 and 7 days was 20.7% and 27.3% in the ED vs 6.5% and 11.4% in the clinic (adjusted relative risk at 3 days (aRR) (95% CI) 3.17 (1.77 to 5.66) and aRR at 7 days 2.24 (1.46 to 3.44)). The mean cost (95% CI) of care (CAD) at the index visit was $C96.68 (92.62 to 100.74) in the ED vs $C48.82 (45.47 to 52.16) in the clinic (mean difference (95% CI): 46.15 (41.29 to 51.02)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was less common in the ED than in the clinic (1.5% vs 16.4%; aRR 0.10 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32)). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of return visits and cost of care were significantly higher in the ED, while antibiotic use for URTI was more frequent in the walk-in clinic. These data may help determine which setting offers the highest value to ambulatory children with acute respiratory conditions.

A systematic review of tools for predicting complications in patients with influenza-like illness.

Objective: To identify tools that predict the risk of complications for patients presenting to an outpatient clinic or an emergency department (ED) with influenza-like illness. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to July 2023. We included articles reporting on the derivation or validation of a score or algorithm used to stratify the risk of hospitalization or mortality among patients with influenza-like illness in the ED or outpatient clinic. Results: Twelve articles reporting on eight scores and six predictive models were identified. For predicting the need for hospitalization, the area under the curve (AUC) of the PMEWS and the CURB-65 ranged respectively from 0.76 to 0.94, and 0.65 to 0.88. The Community Assessment Tool had an AUC of 0.62. For predicting inpatient mortality, AUC was 0.66 for PMEWS and 0.79 for CURB-65, 0.79 for the SIRS criteria and 0.86 for the qSOFA score. Two scores were developed without external validation during the Covid-19 pandemic. The CovHos score and the Canadian Covid discharge score had an AUC ranged from 0.70 to 0.91. The predictive models performed adequately (AUC from 0.76 to 0.92) but will require external validation for clinical use. Tool diversity and study population heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Conclusion: Although the CURB, PMEWS and qSOFA scores appear to predict accurately the risk of complications of influenza-like illness, none were reliable enough to justify their widespread ED use. Refinement of an existing tool or development of a new tool to optimize the management of these patients is needed.

A value-based comparison of the management of respiratory diseases in walk-in clinics and emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare some of the health outcomes and costs associated with value of care in emergency departments (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory patients presenting with an acute respiratory disease. METHODS: A health records review was conducted from April 2016 through March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ambulatory patients at least 18 years old, (ii) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or walk-in clinic within three and seven days of the index visit. Secondary outcomes were the mean cost of care and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients. The cost of care was estimated from the Ministry of Health's perspectives using time-driven activity-based costing. RESULTS: The ED group included 170 patients and the walk-in clinic group 326 patients. The return visit incidences at three and seven days were, respectively, 25.9% and 38.2% in the ED vs. 4.9% and 14.7% in the walk-in clinic (adjusted relative risk (arr) of 4.7 (95% CI 2.6-8.6) and 2.7 (1.9-3.9)). The mean cost ($Cdn) of the index visit care was 116.0 (106.3-125.7) in the ED vs. 62.5 (57.7-67.3) in the walk-in clinic (mean difference of 56.4 (45.7-67.1)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was 5.6% in the ED vs. 24.7% in the walk-in clinic (arr 0.2, 0.01-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first in a larger research program to compare the value of care between walk-in clinics and the ED. The potential advantages of walk-in clinics over EDs (lower costs, lower incidence of return visits) for ambulatory patients with respiratory diseases should be considered in healthcare planning.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Notre objectif était de comparer certains des résultats sanitaires et des coûts associés à la valeur des soins dans les services d'urgence et les cliniques sans rendez-vous pour les patients ambulatoires souffrant d'une maladie respiratoire aiguë. MéTHODES: Une revue des dossiers médicaux a été réalisée d'avril 2016 à mars 2017 dans un service d'urgence et une clinique sans rendez-vous. Les critères d'inclusion étaient les suivants : (i) patients ambulatoires âgés d'au moins 18 ans, (ii) renvoyés chez eux avec un diagnostic d'infection des voies respiratoires supérieures (IVRS), de pneumonie, d'asthme aigu ou d'exacerbation aiguë de la maladie pulmonaire obstructive chronique. Le résultat primaire était la proportion de patients retournant à un service d'urgence ou à une clinique sans rendez-vous dans les trois et sept jours suivant la visite de référence. Les résultats secondaires étaient le coût moyen des soins et l'incidence de la prescription d'antibiotiques pour les patients atteints d'IVRS. Le coût des soins a été estimé à partir des perspectives du ministère de la santé, en utilisant la méthode de calcul des coûts par activité en fonction du temps. RéSULTATS: Le groupe des urgences comprenait 170 patients et le groupe des cliniques sans rendez-vous 326 patients. Les incidences des visites de retour à trois et sept jours étaient respectivement de 25,9 % et 38,2 % dans le service des urgences contre 4,9 % et 14,7 % à la clinique sans rendez-vous (risque relatif ajusté (arr) de 4,7 (IC à 95 % 2,6 à 8,6) et 2,7 (1,9-3,9)). Le coût moyen ($CAN) de la visite de référence était de 116,0 (106,3-125,7) aux urgences contre 62,5 (57,7-67,3) dans la clinique sans rendez-vous (différence moyenne de 56,4 (45,7-67,1)). La prescription d'antibiotiques pour l'IVRS était de 5,6 % aux urgences contre 24,7 % dans la clinique sans rendez-vous (arr 0,2, 0,01-0,6). CONCLUSIONS: Cette étude est la première d'un programme de recherche plus vaste visant à comparer la valeur des soins entre les cliniques sans rendez-vous et les urgences. Les avantages potentiels des cliniques sans rendez-vous par rapport aux services d'urgence (coûts moindres, incidence plus faible des visites de retour) pour les patients ambulatoires souffrant de maladies respiratoires devraient être pris en compte dans la planification des soins de santé.

Adaptation of time-driven activity-based costing to the evaluation of the efficiency of ambulatory care provided in the emergency department.

Objectives: The aim of this study was: (1) to adapt the time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) method to emergency department (ED) ambulatory care; (2) to estimate the cost of care associated with frequently encountered ambulatory conditions; and (3) to compare costs calculated using estimated time and objectively measured time. Methods: TDABC was applied to a retrospective cohort of patients with upper respiratory tract infections, urinary tract infections, unspecified abdominal pain, lower back pain and limb lacerations who visited an ED in Québec City (Canada) during fiscal year 2015-2016. The calculated cost of care was the product of the time required to complete each care procedure and the cost per minute of each human resource or equipment involved. Costing based on durations estimated by care professionals were compared to those based on objective measurements in the field. Results: Overall, 220 care episodes were included and 3080 time measurements of 75 different processes were collected. Differences between costs calculated using estimated and measured times were statistically significant for all conditions except lower back pain and ranged from $4.30 to $55.20 (US) per episode. Differences were larger for conditions requiring more advanced procedures, such as imaging or the attention of ED professionals. Conclusions: The greater the use of advanced procedures or the involvement of ED professionals in the care, the greater is the discrepancy between estimated-time-based and measured-time-based costing. TDABC should be applied using objective measurement of the time per procedure.