RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) are an essential component of any developed health care system. There is, however, no national description of EDs in Switzerland. Our objective was to establish the number and location of EDs, patient visits and flow, medical staff and organization, and capabilities in 2006, as a benchmark before emergency medicine became a subspecialty in Switzerland. METHODS: In 2007, we started to create an inventory of all hospital-based EDs with a preliminary list from the Swiss Society of Emergency and Rescue Medicine that was improved with input from ED physicians nationwide. EDs were eligible if they offered acute care 24 h per day, 7 days per week. Our goal was to have 2006 data from at least 80% of all EDs. The survey was initiated in 2007 and the 80% threshold reached in 2012. RESULTS: In 2006, Switzerland had a total of 138 hospital-based EDs. The number of ED visits was 1.475 million visits or 20 visits per 100 inhabitants. The median number of visits was 8,806 per year; 25% of EDs admitted 5,000 patients or less, 31% 5,001-10,000 patients, 26% 10,001-20,000 patients, and 17% >20,000 patients per year. Crowding was reported by 84% of EDs with >20,000 visits/year. Residents with limited experience provided care for 77% of visits. Imaging was not immediately available for all patients: standard X-ray within 15 min (70%), non-contrast head CT scan within 15 min (38%), and focused sonography for trauma (70%); 67% of EDs had an intensive care unit within the hospital, and 87% had an operating room always available. CONCLUSIONS: Swiss EDs were significant providers of health care in 2006. Crowding, physicians with limited experience, and the heterogeneity of emergency care capabilities were likely threats to the ubiquitous and consistent delivery of quality emergency care, particularly for time-sensitive conditions. Our survey establishes a benchmark to better understand future improvements in Swiss emergency care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, emergency consultations have been done by a general practitioner (GP) in Switzerland. Over the last years, there seems to have been a shift between general practice to hospital emergency ward utilisation. There are several local initiatives of general practitioners and hospitals to change the organisation of emergency care. To plan a new organisation form of emergency care, delivery should be based on population based data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the epidemiology and distribution of emergency consultations of primary care in a hospital and in a practice of general practitioners. In addition, factors of clinical performance in emergency consultations are of great public health interest. METHODS: For this survey, all emergency patient contacts of general practitioners from the catchment area of Bülach, serving 27 088 inhabitants, were assessed by a questionnaire during the fourth quarter of 2006. Sex, age, time, duration of the contact and triage diagnosis were assessed. In addition, all patients seen by the emergency ward at the local hospital were assessed. Contact rates and hospitalisation rates per 100 000 inhabitants were determined. In addition, a multiple linear regression model was performed to determine factors associated with consultation time as a marker for clinical performance. RESULTS: Between October 1th and December 31th 2006, 1001 patient contacts were registered at the same time period in the hospital and general practice. The patient contact rate was 94.8 contacts per 100 000 inhabitants per day, and the hospitalisation rate was 9.1 patient per 100 000 inhabitants. Patients seen at the hospital were older than in general practice (41.2 ± 22.8 vs. 32.6 ± 26.3 years) and consultation and waiting time was longer in the hospital than consultation time with the GP (144.8 ± 106.5 vs. 19.6 ± 17.6 minutes). CONCLUSION: Nearly 1 out of 1000 inhabitants were looking for emergency primary care help, and 10% of the patients were seen urgently by general practitioners and hospital staff and were hospitalised. These numbers are important information for planning emergency primary care facilities. The most prevalent triage diagnoses in practice are infections, traumatological reasons and ENT-problems, whereas in hospital the most frequent triage diagnosis is a traumatological disorder, followed by thoracic pain and infections. In addition, GP's treat patients more rapidly than a hospital does and treat patients in shorter time intervals.