Profiling frequent attenders at an inner city emergency department

2019 ◽  
Vol 188 (3) ◽  
pp. 1013-1019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Uí Bhroin ◽  
James Kinahan ◽  
Adrian Murphy
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Kaehne ◽  
Paula Keating

Abstract Background Emergency department (ED) attendances are contributing to rising costs of the National Health Service (NHS) in England. Critically assessing the impact of new services to reduce emergency department use can be difficult as new services may create additional access points, unlocking latent demand. The study evaluated an Acute Visiting Scheme (AVS) in a primary care context. We asked if AVS reduces overall ED demand and whether or not it changed utilisation patterns for frequent attenders. Method The study used a pre post single cohort design. The impact of AVS on all-cause ED attendances was hypothesised as a substitution effect, where AVS duty doctor visits would replace emergency department visits. Primary outcome was frequency of ED attendances. End points were reduction of frequency of service use and increase of intervals between attendances by frequent attenders. Results ED attendances for AVS users rose by 47.6%. If AVS use was included, there was a more than fourfold increase of total service utilisation, amounting to 438.3%. It shows that AVS unlocked significant latent demand. However, there was some reduction in the frequency of ED attendances for some patients and an increase in time intervals between ED attendances for others. Conclusion The study demonstrates that careful analysis of patient utilisation can detect a differential impact of AVS on the use of ED. As the new service created additional access points for patients and hence introduces an element of choice, the new service is likely to unlock latent demand. This study illustrates that AVS may be most useful if targeted at specific patient groups who are most likely to benefit from the new service.


2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 332-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Dent ◽  
Glenys Hunter ◽  
Andrew Philip Webster

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy A Ernst ◽  
Eduardo Marvez ◽  
Todd G. Nick ◽  
Eric Chin ◽  
Edmond Wood ◽  
...  

Study objective. The purpose of the present study is to compare LAT gel (4% lidocaine, 1:2000 adrenaline, 0.5% tetracaine) to TAC gel (0.5% tetracaine, 1:2000 adrenaline, 11.8% cocaine) for efficacy, side effects, and costs in children aged 5 to 17 years with facial or scalp lacerations. Design. Randomized, prospective, double-blinded clinical trial. Setting. Inner-city Emergency Department with an Emergency Medicine residency program. Patients or other participants. Children aged 5 to 17 years with linear lacerations of the face or scalp. Intervention. After informed consent was obtained patients had lacerations anesthetized with topical TAC or LAT gel according to a random numbers table. Measurements and main results. A total of 95 patients were included in the statistical analysis with 47 receiving TAC and 48 receiving LAT. Physicians and patients/parents separately rated the overall pain of suturing using a modified multidimensional scale for pain assessment specifically for children. Patients/parents also stated the number of sutures causing pain. The power of the study to determine a ranked sum difference of 15 was 0.8. Multidimensional rating scale results and number and percentage of sutures causing pain were compared using Wilcoxon's rank sum test. According to patients no difference could be detected in percent of sutures causing pain in the LAT versus TAC group (P = .51). Using the multidimensional scale, physicians and patients/parents found LAT statistically the same as TAC in effectiveness (P = .80 for physicians and P = .71 for patients). Cost per application was $3.00 for LAT compared to $35.00 for TAC. Follow-up was accomplished in 85 of 95 participants in the study with no reported complications for either medication. Conclusion. LAT gel worked as well as TAC gel for topical anesthesia in facial and scalp lacerations. Considering the advantages of a noncontrolled substance and less expense, LAT gel appears to be better suited than TAC gel for topical anesthesia in laceration repair in children.


1999 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. H. Akerman ◽  
Richard Sinert

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Murli U Purswani ◽  
Jessica Bucciarelli ◽  
Jose Tiburcio ◽  
Shamuel M Yagudayev ◽  
Georgia H Connell ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE: To describe the seroprevalence and risk for SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers (HCWs) by job function and work location following the pandemic’s first wave in New York City (NYC). METHODS: A cross-sectional study conducted between May 18 and June 26, 2020, during which HCWs at a large inner-city teaching hospital in NYC received voluntary antibody testing. The main outcome was presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies indicating previous infection. Seroprevalence and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for seropositivity by type and location of work were calculated using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 2,749 HCWs tested, 831 tested positive, yielding a crude seroprevalence of 30.2% (95% CI, 29%-32%). Seroprevalence ranged from 11.1% for pharmacy staff to 44.0% for nonclinical HCWs comprised of patient transporters and housekeeping and security staff, with 37.5% for nurses and 20.9% for administrative staff. Compared to administrative staff, aORs (95% CIs) for seropositivity were 2.54 (1.64-3.94) for nurses; 2.51 (1.42-4.43) for nonclinical HCWs; between 1.70 and 1.83 for allied HCWs such as patient care technicians, social workers, registration clerks and therapists; and 0.80 (0.50-1.29) for physicians. Compared to office locations, aORs for the emergency department and inpatient units were 2.27 (1.53-3.37) and 1.48 (1.14-1.92), respectively. CONCLUSION: One-third of hospital-based HCWs were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 by the end of the first wave in NYC. Seroprevalence differed by job function and work location, with the highest estimated risk for nurses and the emergency department, respectively. These findings support current nationwide policy prioritizing HCWs for receipt of newly authorized COVID-19 vaccines.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document