Hospital Occupancy and its Effect on Emergency Department Evaluation - 19/01/22
Abstract |
Study objective |
To examine whether hospital occupancy was associated with increased testing and treatment during emergency department (ED) evaluations, resulting in reduced admissions.
Methods |
We analyzed the electronic health records of an urban academic ED. We linked data from all ED visits from October 1, 2010, to May 29, 2015, with daily hospital occupancy (inpatients/total staffed beds). Outcome measures included the frequency of laboratory testing, advanced imaging, medication administration, and hospitalizations. We modeled each outcome using multivariable negative binomial or logistic regression, as appropriate, and examined their association with daily hospital occupancy quartiles, controlling for patient and visit characteristics. We calculated the adjusted outcome rates and relative changes at each daily hospital occupancy quartile using marginal estimating methods.
Results |
We included 270,434 ED visits with a mean patient age of 48.1 (standard deviation 19.8) years; 40.1% were female, 22.8% were non-Hispanic Black, and 51.5% were commercially insured. Hospital occupancy was not associated with differences in laboratory testing, advanced imaging, or medication administration. Compared with the first quartile, the third and fourth quartiles of daily hospital occupancy were associated with decreases of 1.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] −2.9 to −0.2; absolute change −0.6 percentage points [95% CI −1.2 to −0.1]) and 4.6% (95% CI −6.0 to −3.2; absolute change −1.9 percentage points [95% CI −2.5 to −1.3]) in hospitalizations, respectively.
Conclusion |
The lack of association between hospital occupancy and laboratory testing, advanced imaging, and medication administration suggest that changes in ED testing or treatment did not facilitate the decrease in admissions during periods of high hospital occupancy.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Please see page 173 for the Editor’s Capsule Summary of this article. |
|
Supervising editor: Steve Goodacre, PhD. Specific detailed information about possible conflict of interest for individual editors is available at editors. |
|
Author contributions: S-CC, JDS, and SGW conceived the study and designed the analysis. S-CC and JDS obtained research funding. S-CC, CYC, and PCC facilitated data collection. S-CC conducted the analyses and drafted the manuscript, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. S-CC takes responsibility for the paper as a whole. |
|
All authors attest to meeting the four ICMJE.org authorship criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. |
|
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. Supported by Emergency Medicine Foundation Practice Intensity Grant. |
|
Trial registration number: |
|
Readers: click on the link to go directly to a survey in which you can provide LVMF38N to Annals on this particular article. |
|
A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com. |
Vol 79 - N° 2
P. 172-181 - février 2022 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?