scholarly journals PL04: Comparison of the cost and the quality of the care provided to low acuity patients in an emergency department and a walk-in clinic

CJEM ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (S1) ◽  
pp. S6 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Berthelot ◽  
M. Mallet ◽  
D. Simonyan ◽  
J. Guertin ◽  
L. Moore ◽  
...  

Introduction: Low acuity patients have been controversially tagged as a source of emergency department (ED) misuse. Authorities for many Canadian health regions have set up policies so these patients preferably present to walk-in clinics (WIC). We compared the cost and quality of the care given to low acuity patients in an academic ED and a WIC of Québec City during fiscal year 2015-16. Methods: We conducted an ambidirectional (prospective and retrospective) cohort study using a time-driven activity-based costing method. This method uses duration of care processes (e.g., triage) to allocate to patient care all direct costs (e.g., personnel, consumables), overheads (e.g., building maintenance) and physician charges. We included consecutive adult patients, ambulatory at all time and discharged from the ED or WIC with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), urinary tract infection (UTI) or low back pain. Mean cost [95%CI] per patient per condition was compared between settings after risk-adjustment for age, sex, vital signs, number of regular medications and co-morbidities using generalized log-gamma regression models. Proportions [95%CI] of antibiotic prescription and chest X-Ray use in URTI, compliance with provincial guidelines on use of antibiotics in UTI, and column X-Ray use in low back pain were compared between settings using a Pearson Chi-Square test. Results: A total of 409 patients were included. ED and WIC groups were similar in terms of age, sex and vital signs on presentation, but ED patients had a greater burden of comorbidities. Adjusted mean cost (2016 CAN$) of care was significantly higher in the ED than in the WIC (p < 0.0001) for URTI (78.42[64.85-94.82] vs. 59.43[50.43-70.06]), UTI (78.88[69.53-89.48] vs. 53.29[43.68-65.03]), and low back pain (87.97[68.30-113.32] vs. 61.71[47.90-79.51]). For URTI, antibiotics were more frequently prescribed in the WIC (44.1%[34.3-54.3] vs. 5.8%[1.2-16.0]; p < 0.0001) and chest X-Rays, more frequently used in the ED (26.9%[15.6-41.0] vs. 13.7%[7.7-22.0]; p = 0.05). No significant differences were observed in the compliance with guidelines on use of antibiotics in UTI and in the use of column X-Ray in low back pain. Conclusion: Total cost of care for low acuity patients is lower in walk-in clinics than in EDs. However, our results suggest that quality-of-care issues should be considered in determining the best alternate setting for treating ambulatory emergency patients.

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Nyström ◽  
Birgitta Gregebo ◽  
Adam Taube ◽  
Stig-Olof Almgren ◽  
Birgitta Schillberg ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundIt has been reported that in 13-32% of patients with chronic low back pain, the pain may originate in the sacroiliac (SI) joints. When treatment of these patients with analgesics and physiotherapy has failed, a surgical solution may be discussed. Results of such surgery are often based on small series, retrospective analyses or studies using a minimal invasive technique, frequently sponsored by manufacturers.PurposeTo report the clinical outcome concerning pain, function and quality of life following anterior arthrodesis in patients presumed to have SI joint pain using validated questionnaires pre- and post-operatively. An additional aim was to describe the symptoms of the patients included and the preoperative investigations performed.Material and methodsOver a 6 year period we treated 55 patients, all women, with a mean age of 45 years (range 28-65) and a mean pelvic pain duration of 9.1 years (range 2-30). The pain started in connection with minor trauma in seven patients, pregnancy in 20 and unspecified in 28. All patients had undergone long periods of treatment including physiotherapy, manipulation, needling, pelvic belt, massage and chiropractic without success, and 15 had been operated for various spinal diagnoses without improvement. The patients underwent thorough neurological investigation, plain X-ray and MRI of the spine and plain X-ray of the pelvis. They were investigated by seven clinical tests aimed at indicating pain from the SI joints. In addition, all patients underwent a percutaneous mechanical provocation test and extra-articular local anaesthetic blocks against the posterior part of the SI joints. Before surgery all patients answered the generic Short-Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire, the disease specific Balanced Inventory for Spinal Disorders (BIS) questionnaire and rated their level of pelvic and leg pain (VAS, 0-100). At follow-up at a mean of 2 years 49 patients completed the same questionnaires (89%).ResultsAt follow-up 26 patients reported a lower level of pelvic pain than before surgery, 16 the same level and six a higher level. Applying Svensson’s method RPpelvic pain = 0.3976, with 95% CI (0.2211, 0.5740) revealed a statistically significant systematic improvement in pelvic pain. At follow-up 28 patients reported a higher quality of life and 26 reported sleeping better than pre-operatively. In most patients the character of the pelvic pain was dull and aching, often accompanied by a stabbing component in connection with sudden movements. Referred pain down the leg/s even to the feet and toes was noted by half of the patients and 29 experienced frequency of micturition.ConclusionsIt is apparent that in some patients the SI joints may cause long-term pain that can be treated by arthrodesis. We speculate that continued pain despite a healed arthrodesis may be due to persistent pain from adjacent ligaments. The next step should be a prospective randomized study comparing posterior fusion and ligament resection with non-surgical treatment.ImplicationsAnterior arthrodesis can apparently relieve pain in some patients with presumed SI joint pain. The problem is how to identify these patients within the low back pain group.


2020 ◽  
pp. emermed-2019-209294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle M Coombs ◽  
Gustavo C Machado ◽  
Bethan Richards ◽  
Crystian B Oliveira ◽  
Robert D Herbert ◽  
...  

IntroductionLow back pain, and especially non-specific low back pain, is a common cause of presentation to the emergency department (ED). Although these patients typically report relatively high pain intensity, the clinical course of their pain and disability remains unclear. Our objective was to review the literature and describe the clinical course of non-specific low back pain after an ED visit.MethodsElectronic searches were conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE from inception to March 2019. We screened for cohort studies or randomised trials investigating pain or disability in patients with non-specific low back pain presenting to EDs. We excluded studies that enrolled participants with minimal pain or disability scores at baseline. Two reviewers independently screened the full texts, extracted the data and assessed risk of bias and quality of evidence. Estimates of pain and disability were converted to a common 0–100 scale. We estimated pooled means and 95% CIs of pain and disability as a function of time since ED presentation.ResultsEight studies (nine publications) with a total of 1994 patients provided moderate overall quality evidence of the expected clinical course of low back pain after an ED visit. Seven of the eight studies were assessed to have a low risk of bias. At the time of the ED presentation, the pooled estimate of the mean pain score on a 0–100 scale was 71.0 (95% CI 64.2–77.9). This reduced to 46.1 (95% CI 37.2–55.0) after 1 day, 41.8 (95% CI 34.7 to 49.0) after 1 week and 13.5 (95% CI 5.8–21.3) after 26 weeks. The course of disability followed a similar pattern.ConclusionsPatients presenting to EDs with non-specific low back pain experience rapid reductions in pain intensity, but on average symptoms persisted 6 months later. This review can be used to educate patients so they can have realistic expectations of their recovery.


Author(s):  
Sweekriti Sharma ◽  
Adrian C. Traeger ◽  
Gustavo C. Machado ◽  
Christina Abdel Shaheed ◽  
Caitlin Jones ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Yen-Mou Lu ◽  
Chung-Hwan Chen ◽  
Yi-Jing Lue

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender affect responses to pain, but little is known about disability and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of sex and gender on disability and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with low back pain. METHODS: Ninety-three patients with low back pain were included in this cross-sectional survey study. Disability, HRQOL and gender identity were respectively assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form-36 and Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were classified into four gender role orientations (masculinity, femininity, androgyny and undifferentiated). One-way analysis of variance was used to analyze both the sex and the gender role orientation. RESULTS: Females had higher disability than males (p< 0.05), but in gender identity, no significant difference was found. Seven domains of HRQOL were lower than the healthy norms. Males experienced greater impacts than females on vitality and mental health (p< 0.05). For gender identity, five domains of HRQOL had significant differences (p< 0.05). Masculinity orientation had the least impact on four domains (p< 0.05), while undifferentiated orientation had the largest impact on all domains. CONCLUSION: Sex and gender effects can be used to analyze disability and HRQOL in patients with low back pain. Females have higher disability, while HRQOL is greatly influenced by different gender role orientations.


Author(s):  
Waleska Reyes-Ferrada ◽  
Luis Chirosa-Rios ◽  
Angela Rodriguez-Perea ◽  
Daniel Jerez-Mayorga ◽  
Ignacio Chirosa-Rios

Background: The purpose of this systematic review was to: (I) determine the quality of evidence from studies assessing trunk isokinetic strength in subjects with acute low back pain (ALBP) compared to healthy subjects and (II) establish reference values of isokinetic trunk strength in subjects with ALBP. Methodology: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statements were followed using keywords associated with trunk, strength and low back pain. Four databases were used: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and SPORTDiscus. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). Results: A total of 1604 articles were retrieved, four included in this review. All were evaluated as high risk of bias (Rob). Due to the high Rob and the diversity of protocols, instruments and variables used, it was not possible to determine reference values for subjects with ALBP, we can only establish a range of flexion peak torque (PT) between 175.1 and 89.7 Nm at 60°/s and between 185 and 81.5 Nm at 120°/s, and for extension PT between 240.0 and 91.5 Nm at 60°/s and between 217.5 and 69.2 Nm at 120°/s in subjects with ALBP. Conclusions: Due to the low quality of the evidence and the diversity of protocols used when measuring trunk isokinetic strength, it is necessary to carry out new high-quality research to establish reference values of trunk strength in subjects with ALBP.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document