Health care utilization and outcomes of patients seen by virtual urgent care versus in-person emergency department care.

BACKGROUND: Virtual urgent care (VUC) is intended to support diversion of patients with low-acuity complaints and reduce the need for in-person emergency department visits. We aimed to describe subsequent health care utilization and outcomes of patients who used VUC compared with similar patients who had an in-person emergency department visit. METHODS: We used patient-level encounter data that were prospectively collected for patients using VUC services provided by 14 pilot programs in Ontario, Canada. We linked the data to provincial administrative databases to identify subsequent 30-day health care utilization and outcomes. We defined 2 subgroups of VUC users; those with a documented prompt referral to an emergency department by a VUC provider, and those without. We matched patients in each cohort to an equal number of patients presenting to an emergency department in person, based on encounter date, medical concern and the logit of a propensity score. For the subgroup of patients not promptly referred to an emergency department, we matched patients to those who were seen in an emergency department and then discharged home. RESULTS: Of the 19 595 patient VUC visits linked to administrative data, we matched 2129 patients promptly referred to the emergency department by a VUC provider to patients presenting to the emergency department in person. Index visit hospital admissions (9.4% v. 8.7%), 30-day emergency department visits (17.0% v. 17.5%), and hospital admissions (12.9% v. 11.0%) were similar between the groups. We matched 14 179 patients who were seen by a VUC provider with no documented referral to the emergency department. Patients seen by VUC were more likely to have a subsequent in-person emergency department visit within 72 hours (13.7% v. 7.0%), 7 days (16.5% v. 10.3%) and 30 days (21.9% v. 17.9%), but hospital admissions were similar within 72 hours (1.1% v. 1.3%), and higher within 30 days for patients who were discharged home from the emergency department (2.6% v. 3.4%). INTERPRETATION: The impact of the provincial VUC pilot program on subsequent health care utilization was limited. There is a need to better understand the inherent limitations of virtual care and ensure future virtual providers have timely access to in-person outpatient resources, to prevent subsequent emergency department visits.

"It saved me from the emergency department": A qualitative study of patient experience of virtual urgent care in Ontario.

INTRODUCTION: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ontario Ministry of Health introduced a pilot program of 14 virtual urgent care (VUC) initiatives across the province to encourage physical distancing and provision of care by telephone and video-enabled visits. The implementation of the VUC pilot is currently being evaluated by an external academic team. The objective of this study was to understand patient experiences with VUC to determine barriers and facilitators to optimal virtual care as it rapidly expands during the current pandemic and beyond. METHOD: The qualitative component of the evaluation used one-on-one telephone interviews with patients, families, providers, and program administrators as the main method of data collection. Patient and family participants were invited to participate by the triage nurse after their VUC visit. Data analysis, using thematic analysis, occurred in conjunction with data collection to monitor emerging themes and areas for further exploration. RESULTS: Between April and October 2021, we completed 14 patient and/or family interviews from a representative cross-section of 6 pilot sites. Participants had a range of presenting complaints including infection, injury, medication side effects, and abdominal pain. The vast majority of participants were female (90%), and 70% were VUC patients themselves. Our analysis identified three key themes in the data which characterise patient and family member experience with VUC: a) emphasis on access to the ED; b) efficiency and quality of care; c) obtaining reassurance and next steps. CONCLUSION: Virtual care options are valued by patients and families; however, the nature of care needed by those accessing VUC and who can best provide that care needs to be evaluated to position it for sustainability. Understanding how virtual care performs from both a provider and patient perspective during the current crisis has implications for designing alternative care options beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

Demographic characteristics, outcomes and experience of patients using virtual urgent care services from 14 emergency department led sites in Ontario.

INTRODUCTION: As part of the COVID-19 pandemic response, the Ontario Ministry of Health funded a virtual care pilot program intended to support emergency department (ED) diversion of patients with low acuity complaints and reduce the need for face-to-face contact. The objective was to describe the demographic characteristics, outcomes and experience of patients using the provincial pilot program. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients using virtual care services provided by 14 ED-led pilot sites from December 2020 to September 2021. Patients who completed a virtual visit were invited by email to complete a standardized, 25-item online survey, which included questions related to satisfaction and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: There were 22,278 virtual visits. When patients were asked why they contacted virtual urgent care, of the 82.7% patients who had a primary care provider, 31.0% said they could not make a timely appointment with their family physician. Rash, fever, abdominal pain, and COVID-19 vaccine queries represented 30% of the presenting complaints. Of 19,613 patients with a known disposition, 12,910 (65.8%) were discharged home and 3,179 (16.2%) were referred to the ED. Of the 2,177 survey responses, 94% rated their overall experience as 8/10 or greater. More than 80% said they had answers to all the questions they had related to their health concern, believed they were able to manage the issue, had a plan they could follow, and knew what to do if the issue got worse or came back. CONCLUSIONS: Many presenting complaints were low acuity, and most patients had a primary care provider, but timely access was not available. Future work should focus on health equity to ensure virtual care is accessible to underserved populations. We question if virtual urgent care can be safely and more economically provided by non-emergency physicians.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Dans le cadre de la réponse à la pandémie de COVID-19, le ministère de la Santé de l'Ontario a financé un programme pilote de soins virtuels visant à soutenir la réorientation vers les services d'urgence des patients présentant des problèmes de faible acuité et à réduire le besoin de contact en personne. L'objectif était de décrire les caractéristiques démographiques, les résultats et l'expérience des patients utilisant le programme pilote provincial. MéTHODES: Il s'agissait d'une étude de cohorte prospective de patients utilisant des services de soins virtuels fournis par 14 sites pilotes dirigés par des services d'urgence, de décembre 2020 à septembre 2021. Les patients qui ont effectué une visite virtuelle ont été invités par courriel à répondre à une enquête en ligne standardisée de 25 questions, qui comprenait des questions relatives à la satisfaction et aux résultats rapportés par les patients. RéSULTATS: Il y a eu 22 278 visites virtuelles. Lorsqu'on a demandé aux patients pourquoi ils avaient contacté les soins urgents virtuels, sur les 82,7 % de patients qui avaient un prestataire de soins primaires, 31,0 % ont répondu qu'ils n'avaient pas pu obtenir un rendez-vous en temps voulu avec leur médecin de famille. Les éruptions cutanées, la fièvre, les douleurs abdominales et les interrogations sur le vaccin COVID-19 représentaient 30 % des plaintes présentées. Sur les 19 613 patients dont la disposition était connue, 12 910 (65,8 %) ont été renvoyés chez eux et 3 179 (16,2 %) ont été orientés vers les urgences. Sur les 2 177 réponses à l'enquête, 94 % ont attribué une note de 8/10 ou plus à leur expérience globale. Plus de 80 % d'entre eux ont déclaré avoir obtenu des réponses à toutes les questions qu'ils se posaient sur leur problème de santé, se croire capables de le gérer, avoir un plan qu'ils pouvaient suivre et savoir quoi faire si le problème s'aggravait ou revenait. CONCLUSIONS: De nombreuses plaintes présentées étaient de faible acuité, et la plupart des patients avaient un fournisseur de soins primaires, mais l'accès en temps opportun n'était pas disponible. Les travaux futurs devraient se concentrer sur l'équité en matière de santé pour s'assurer que les soins virtuels sont accessibles aux populations mal desservies et nous nous demandons si ces services peuvent être fournis en toute sécurité et de manière plus économique par des médecins non urgentistes.

Impact of an Electronic Decision-Support System on Nursing Triage Process: A Usability and Workflow Analysis.

PURPOSE: To qualitatively contrast emergency department triage workflow using a paper-based triage system and an electronic decision-support tool (electronic Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (eCTAS)). METHODS: Triage nurses from a single institution were invited to perform triage assessments of mock patients using a paper-based triage system and eCTAS. These assessments were completed using simulation scenarios, some of which involved facilitators probing triage nurses' thoughts on the design of the eCTAS system. Participants were asked to "think aloud," describing their thought patterns as they completed the triage process. Similar patient scenarios with the same Canadian Emergency Department Information System (CEDIS) presenting complaint and triage score were used for comparison between paper-based triage and electronic decision-support tool (eCTAS) conditions. RESULTS: Eight participants completed at least two simulation scenarios for each condition and at least one usability scenario with eCTAS. The simulated encounters showed eCTAS provided several advantages to paper-based triage assessment process by shortlisting possible CEDIS complaints and preselecting relevant modifiers. However, usability concerns were identified with eCTAS including challenges related to data entry and eCTAS score overrides. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights several positive features of eCTAS and usability issues that should be addressed to enhance the intended use of eCTAS and support user adoption.

Consistency of triage scores by presenting complaint pre- and post-implementation of a real-time electronic triage decision support tool.

OBJECTIVE: eCTAS is a real-time electronic decision-support tool designed to standardize the application of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). This study addresses the variability of CTAS score distributions across institutions pre- and post-eCTAS implementation. METHODS: We used population-based administrative data from 2016-2018 from all emergency departments (EDs) that had implemented eCTAS for 9 months. Following a 3-month stabilization period, we compared 6 months post-eCTAS data to the same 6 months the previous year (pre-eCTAS). We included triage encounters of adult (≥17 years) patients who presented with 1 of 16 pre-specified, high-volume complaints. For each ED, consistency was calculated as the absolute difference in CTAS distribution compared to the average of all included EDs for each presenting complaint. Pre-eCTAS and post-eCTAS change scores were compared using a paired-samples t-test. We also assessed if eCTAS modifiers were associated with triage consistency. RESULTS: There were 363,214 (183,231 pre-eCTAS, 179,983 post-eCTAS) triage encounters included from 35 EDs. Triage scores were more consistent (P < 0.05) post-eCTAS for 6 (37.5%) presenting complaints: chest pain (cardiac features), extremity weakness/symptoms of cerebrovascular accident, fever, shortness of breath, syncope, and hyperglycemia. Triage consistency was similar pre- and post-eCTAS for altered level of consciousness, anxiety/situational crisis, confusion, depression/suicidal/deliberate self-harm, general weakness, head injury, palpitations, seizure, substance misuse/intoxication, and vertigo. Use of eCTAS modifiers was associated with increased triage consistency. CONCLUSIONS: eCTAS increased triage consistency across many, but not all, high-volume presenting complaints. Modifier use was associated with increased triage consistency, particularly for non-specific complaints such as fever and general weakness.

Interrater Reliability, Accuracy, and Triage Time Pre- and Post-implementation of a Real-Time Electronic Triage Decision-Support Tool.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The electronic Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (eCTAS) is a real-time electronic triage decision-support tool designed to improve patient safety and quality of care by standardizing the application of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). The objective of this study is to determine interrater agreement of triage scores pre- and post-implementation of eCTAS. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study conducted in 7 emergency departments (EDs), selected to represent a mix of triage documentation practices, hospital types, and patient volumes. A provincial CTAS auditor observed triage nurses in the ED pre- and post-implementation of eCTAS and assigned an independent CTAS score in real time. Research assistants independently recorded triage time. Interrater agreement was estimated with κ statistics with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 1,491 individual triage assessments (752 pre-eCTAS, 739 post-implementation) were audited during 42 7-hour triage shifts (21 pre-eCTAS, 21 post-implementation). Exact modal agreement was achieved for 567 patients (75.4%) pre-eCTAS compared with 685 patients (92.7%) triaged with eCTAS. With the auditor's CTAS score as the reference, eCTAS significantly reduced the number of patients over-triaged (12.0% versus 5.1%; Δ 6.9; 95% CI 4.0 to 9.7) and under-triaged (12.6% versus 2.2%; Δ 10.4; 95% CI 7.9 to 13.2). Interrater agreement was higher with eCTAS (unweighted κ 0.89 versus 0.63; quadratic-weighted κ 0.93 versus 0.79). Median triage time was 312 seconds (n=3,808 patients) pre-eCTAS and 347 seconds (n=3,489 patients) with eCTAS (Δ 35 seconds; 95% CI 29 to 40 seconds). CONCLUSION: A standardized, electronic approach to performing triage assessments improves both interrater agreement and data accuracy without substantially increasing triage time.