Suppr超能文献

CTAS 4级和5级患者对农村急诊科的使用情况。

Rural emergency department use by CTAS IV and V patients.

作者信息

Steele Sandra, Anstett Danielle, Milne W Ken

机构信息

University of Queensland School of Medicine, Brisbane, Australia.

出版信息

CJEM. 2008 May;10(3):209-14. doi: 10.1017/s1481803500010125.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

For a variety of reasons, many emergency department (ED) visits are classified as less- or nonurgent (Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale [CTAS] level IV and V). A recent survey in a tertiary care ED identified some of these reasons. The purpose of our study was to determine if these same reasons applied to patients presenting with problems triaged at a similar level at a low- volume rural ED.

METHODS

A 9-question survey tool was administered to 141 CTAS level IV and V patients who attended the South Huron Hospital ED, in Exeter, Ontario, over a 2-week period in December 2006.

RESULTS

Of the 141 eligible patients, 137 (97.2%) completed the study. One hundred and twenty-two patients (89.1%) reported having a family physician (FP) and 53 (38.7%) had already seen an FP before presenting to the ED. Just over one-half of all patients (51.1%) had their problem for more than 48 hours, and 42 (30.7%) stated that they were referred to the ED for care. Fifty-three (38.7%) of the respondents felt they needed treatment as soon as possible. Many patients reported coming to the ED because: 1) their FP office was closed (21.9%); 2) they could not get a timely appointment (16.8%); or 3) the walk-in clinic was closed (24.8%). Only 6 patients (4.4%) specifically stated that they came to the ED because they had no FP. One-third of patients attended the ED because they believed it offered specialized services.

CONCLUSION

In this rural setting, most less- or nonurgent ED patients had an FP yet they went to the ED because they did not have access to primary care, because they perceived their problem to be urgent or because they were referred for or sought specific services.

摘要

目的

由于多种原因,许多急诊科就诊被归类为低紧急度或非紧急度(加拿大分诊和 acuity 量表[CTAS]IV 级和 V 级)。最近在一家三级医疗急诊科进行的一项调查确定了其中一些原因。我们研究的目的是确定这些相同的原因是否适用于在一家低流量农村急诊科被分诊到类似级别的有问题的患者。

方法

2006 年 12 月的两周时间里,对 141 名就诊于安大略省埃克塞特市南休伦医院急诊科的 CTAS IV 级和 V 级患者使用了一个包含 9 个问题的调查工具。

结果

在 141 名符合条件的患者中,137 名(97.2%)完成了研究。122 名患者(89.1%)报告有家庭医生,53 名(38.7%)在前往急诊科就诊前已经看过家庭医生。所有患者中略超过一半(51.1%)的问题存在超过 48 小时,42 名(30.7%)表示他们被转诊至急诊科接受治疗。53 名(38.7%)受访者认为他们需要尽快接受治疗。许多患者报告前往急诊科的原因是:1)他们的家庭医生办公室关闭(21.9%);2)他们无法及时预约(16.8%);或 3)即时诊所关闭(24.8%)。只有 6 名患者(4.4%)明确表示他们前往急诊科是因为他们没有家庭医生。三分之一的患者前往急诊科是因为他们认为急诊科提供专科服务。

结论

在这个农村地区,大多数低紧急度或非紧急度的急诊科患者有家庭医生,但他们前往急诊科是因为无法获得初级医疗服务,因为他们认为自己的问题紧急,或者因为他们被转诊或寻求特定服务。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验