The influence of an urgent care center on the frequency of ED visits in an urban hospital setting

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Merritt ◽  
Edwin Naamon ◽  
Stephen A Morris
2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7-7
Author(s):  
Christopher Davella ◽  
Peter Whooley ◽  
Emily Milano ◽  
Brian L. Egleston ◽  
Martin Edelman ◽  
...  

7 Background: Studies suggest that many Emergency Department (ED) visits and hospitalizations for cancer patients may be preventable. CMS has made changes to the hospital outpatient reporting program (OP-35) targeting ED visits and admissions in treatment patients for preventable conditions. Oncologic urgent care centers aim to streamline care for this population. Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) developed an urgent care center called the Direct Referral Unit (DRU) in July 2011. We sought to assess the impact of the DRU on care utilization. Methods: We abstracted visits to our adjacent hospital (Jeanes) ED and the DRU from January 2014-June 2018. Visit rates represent the ratio of visits over the total number of patients with a clinic visit at FCCC per year. ED and DRU visits were associated with both a cancer and visit diagnosis per the International Classification of Disease (ICD). Patient demographics were abstracted. We also analyzed visit charges, inpatient admission and 30-day therapy utilization (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radiation). Results: A total of 13,210 visits were analyzed including 5,789 ED visits and 7,421 DRU visits. Visits to the Jeanes ED increased over time. The average age of patients at time of first visit was 63 and visits were most common in females and Caucasians. Hispanic and African American (AA) patients were more likely to visit the ED compared to the DRU (OR: 7.54 and 1.30). Patients with GI (27%) and thoracic (15%) malignancies had the most visits. Commercial insurance use was most common (48%) followed by Medicare (34%) and Medicaid (16%). DRU use was most frequent on Mondays (22%), while ED use occurred the most on Sundays (17%). The most common DRU visit diagnoses in order of prevalence were dehydration, nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain, fever, shortness of breath, fatigue, diarrhea, cellulitis/rash, constipation and anemia. Inpatient admission rates were similar between the two settings (p=.8176). Patients on active cancer treatment more frequently presented to the DRU in comparison to the ED (p<.0001). The average charges were $2226.22 for a DRU visit vs. $10,253.44 for an ED visit. Conclusions: The increase in ED visits over time as well the more frequent ED use in Hispanic and AA patients both suggest a need for greater urgent care access. Many of the most common visit diagnoses to the DRU align with CMS’s list of preventable conditions, demonstrating the DRU’s success as a triage center targeting these conditions. DRU visits were associated with considerable cost savings, supporting the use of cancer urgent care centers as a cost-effective method to reduce acute care.


2021 ◽  
pp. OP.21.00183
Author(s):  
Bonnie E. Gould Rothberg ◽  
Maureen E. Canavan ◽  
Sophia Mun ◽  
Tannaz Sedghi ◽  
Tracy Carafeno ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Acute care imposes a significant burden on patients and cancer care costs. We examined whether an advanced practice provider-driven, cancer-specific urgent care center embedded within a large tertiary academic center decreased acute care use among oncology patients on active therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental study anchored around the Oncology Extended Care Clinic (OECC) opening date. We evaluated two parallel 4-month periods: a post-OECC period that followed a 5-month run-in phase, and the identical calendar period 1 year earlier. Our primary outcomes included all emergency department (ED) presentations and hospital admissions during the 3-month window following the index provider visit. We used Poisson models to calculate absolute pre-OECC v post-OECC rate differences. RESULTS: Our cohort included 2,095 patients in the pre-OECC period and 2,188 in the post-OECC period. We identified 32.6 ED visits/100 patients and 41.2 hospitalizations/100 patients in the pre-OECC period, versus 28.2 ED visits/100 patients and 26.1 hospitalizations/100 patients post-OECC. After adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, and practice location, we observed a significant decrease of 4.6 ED visits/100 patients during the post-OECC period (95% CI, –8.92/100 to –0.28/100; P = .04) compared with the pre-OECC period. There was no significant association between the OECC opening and hospitalization rate (rate difference: –3.29 admissions/100 patients; 95% CI, –8.24/100 to 1.67/100; P = .19). CONCLUSION: Establishing a cancer-specific urgent care center was significantly associated with a modest decrease in emergency room utilization but not with hospitalization rate. Barriers included clinic capacity, patient awareness, and physician comfort with advanced practice provider autonomy. Optimizing workflow and standardizing clinical pathways can create benchmarks useful for value-based payments.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
William S. Pearson ◽  
Guoyu Tao ◽  
Karen Kroeger ◽  
Thomas A. Peterman

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hessam Bavafa ◽  
Anne Canamucio ◽  
Steven C. Marcus ◽  
Christian Terwiesch ◽  
Rachel M. Werner

We study capacity rationing by servers facing differentiated customer classes using data from the Veterans Health Administration, which is the largest integrated healthcare system in the U.S. Using more than 11 million health encounters over two years in which the system was capacity constrained, our study provides a comprehensive analysis of the impacts of provider availability shocks on care channel diversion and delays. The outcomes studied include emergency room (ER) visits broken down by type, urgent care center visits, office and phone visits with one’s own versus another provider, post-ER follow-up visits, and ER readmissions. Availability shocks in our analysis are a residualized measure characterizing weeks in which the provider has fewer (or more) office appointments than expected based on typical patterns. The main finding is that moving from two standard deviations above to two standard deviations below in availability shocks increases ER visits by 2.4%, or about 20,000 yearly ER visits. Interestingly, the increase in ER visits is only present for the non-emergent category, indicating differentiated service to emergent and non-emergent care requests; capacity-constrained providers still tend to the patients in most need. Another finding is that provider availability shocks delay and divert post-ER follow-up care. Yet there is no effect on ER readmissions, a severe outcome of delayed or foregone follow-up, indicating that providers ration by priority these follow-up appointments. This paper was accepted by Vishal Gaur, operations management.


Author(s):  
Eric T. Beck ◽  
Wendy Paar ◽  
Lara Fojut ◽  
Jordan Serwe ◽  
Renee R. Jahnke

The Quidel Sofia SARS FIA test (SOFIA) is a rapid antigen immunoassay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins from nasal or nasopharyngeal swab specimens. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the SOFIA test to the Hologic Aptima SARS-CoV-2 TMA test (APTIMA TMA), a high-throughput molecular diagnostic test that uses transcription mediated amplification for detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid from upper respiratory specimens. Three hundred and 40-seven symptomatic patients, from an urgent care center in an area with a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, were tested in parallel using nasal swabs on the SOFIA test and nasopharyngeal swabs on the APTIMA TMA test. The SOFIA test demonstrated an 82.0% positive percent agreement (PPA) compared to the APTIMA TMA test for symptomatic patients tested ≤ 5 days from symptom onset and a 54.5% PPA for symptomatic patients > 5 days from symptom onset. The Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test was used to determine the cycle threshold (Ct) value from any specimens that were discrepant between the SOFIA and APTIMA TMA tests. Using a Ct value of ≤ 35 as a surrogate for SARS-CoV-2 culture positivity, we estimate that the SOFIA test detected 87.2% of symptomatic patients tested ≤ 5 days from symptom onset that were likely to be culture positive.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document