Department of Emergency Medicine, Helsingborg Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2011 Jul 19;19:43. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-19-43.
Overcrowding in emergency departments is a worldwide problem. A systematic literature review was undertaken to scientifically explore which interventions improve patient flow in emergency departments.
A systematic literature search for flow processes in emergency departments was followed by assessment of relevance and methodological quality of each individual study fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Studies were excluded if they did not present data on waiting time, length of stay, patients leaving the emergency department without being seen or other flow parameters based on a nonselected material of patients. Only studies with a control group, either in a randomized controlled trial or in an observational study with historical controls, were included. For each intervention, the level of scientific evidence was rated according to the GRADE system, launched by a WHO-supported working group.
The interventions were grouped into streaming, fast track, team triage, point-of-care testing (performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department), and nurse-requested x-ray. Thirty-three studies, including over 800,000 patients in total, were included. Scientific evidence on the effect of fast track on waiting time, length of stay, and left without being seen was moderately strong. The effect of team triage on left without being seen was relatively strong, but the evidence for all other interventions was limited or insufficient.
Introducing fast track for patients with less severe symptoms results in shorter waiting time, shorter length of stay, and fewer patients leaving without being seen. Team triage, with a physician in the team, will probably result in shorter waiting time and shorter length of stay and most likely in fewer patients leaving without being seen. There is only limited scientific evidence that streaming of patients into different tracks, performing laboratory analysis in the emergency department or having nurses to request certain x-rays results in shorter waiting time and length of stay.
急诊部门人满为患是一个全球性问题。本系统综述旨在科学探索哪些干预措施可以改善急诊部门的患者流程。
对急诊部门流程进行系统文献检索,然后评估符合纳入标准的每项研究的相关性和方法学质量。如果研究没有提供有关等待时间、停留时间、患者在未接受治疗的情况下离开急诊部门或其他基于非选择患者的流程参数的数据,则将其排除在外。仅纳入有对照组的研究,对照组为随机对照试验或具有历史对照的观察性研究。根据世界卫生组织支持的工作组推出的 GRADE 系统,对每种干预措施的科学证据水平进行评级。
干预措施分为分类、快速通道、团队分诊、床边检测(在急诊室进行实验室分析)和护士要求的 X 光检查。共纳入 33 项研究,总共有超过 80 万名患者。关于快速通道对等待时间、停留时间和未接受治疗离开的影响的科学证据是中等强度的。团队分诊对未接受治疗离开的影响相对较强,但其他所有干预措施的证据有限或不足。
对于症状较轻的患者,引入快速通道可缩短等待时间、停留时间和未接受治疗离开的患者人数。有医生参与的团队分诊可能会缩短等待时间和停留时间,并且很可能会减少未接受治疗离开的患者人数。只有有限的科学证据表明将患者分类到不同的通道、在急诊室进行实验室分析或让护士要求进行某些 X 光检查可以缩短等待时间和停留时间。