Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Ann Emerg Med. 2012 Dec;60(6):693-8. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.05.009. Epub 2012 Jun 26.
Descriptions of emergency department (ED) census often do not differentiate between patients and encounters, and there is no guidance about which unit of analysis is most appropriate. We explore differences between patient- and encounter-level accounting of ED utilization.
Data extracted from hospital databases were used to identify all registered patients at 3 different but geographically proximate EDs: urban academic, urban community, and suburban community. Data were available from 2000 to 2009 for the academic ED and for all 3 EDs from 2003 to 2007. For each ED, we calculated number of encounters, proportion of encounters for "annual new patients" (ie, not seen previously that year), and number of "new patients" (ie, not seen previously during study period). We also determined the annual number of encounters per patient for each ED.
At the academic ED, there were 890,397 encounters involving 256,805 patients. Annual encounters (≈89,000) and patients (≈49,000) remained relatively stable over time. Patients were new in 36.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 35.8% to 36.4%) of year 2 encounters, 25.3% (95% CI 25.1% to 25.6%) of year 5 encounters, and 22.4% (95% CI 22.1% to 22.7%) of year 10 encounters. For community EDs, 50.9% (95% CI 50.4% to 51.5%) and 53.7% (95% CI 53.1% to 54.2%) were new in year 2, and by the fifth year, 35.0% (95% CI 34.5% to 35.5%) and 36.2% (95% CI 35.7% to 36.7%) were new. In the academic ED, 56% of patients had a single encounter during 5 years and less than 6% had more than 8 encounters during that period. In community EDs, 62% of patients had a single encounter during 5 years and less than 3% had more than 8 encounters overall.
EDs provide care to a relatively static population, with truly new patients composing only a minority of encounters. Although multiple encounters per patient are common, highly frequent use occurs for only a minority of ED patients, and then only for a discrete period. Encounters and patients are not equivalent units of analysis, and policymakers and researchers should determine which is most appropriate for their decisionmaking.
急诊科(ED)的患者流量描述通常不区分患者和就诊次数,也没有关于哪种分析单位最合适的指导。我们探讨了基于患者和就诊次数对 ED 利用率的分析差异。
从医院数据库中提取的数据用于识别 3 个地理位置相近的不同 ED 的所有登记患者:城市学术型、城市社区型和郊区社区型。2000 年至 2009 年的数据可用于学术型 ED,2003 年至 2007 年的数据可用于所有 3 个 ED。对于每个 ED,我们计算了就诊次数、“年度新患者”就诊次数的比例(即当年未就诊过的患者)和“新患者”就诊次数(即研究期间未就诊过的患者)。我们还确定了每个 ED 每位患者的年度就诊次数。
在学术型 ED,有 890397 次就诊,涉及 256805 名患者。患者数量(≈49000)和就诊次数(≈89000)在较长时间内相对稳定。第 2 年就诊中,新患者占 36.1%(95%置信区间[CI] 35.8%至 36.4%),第 5 年就诊中占 25.3%(95% CI 25.1%至 25.6%),第 10 年就诊中占 22.4%(95% CI 22.1%至 22.7%)。对于社区型 ED,第 2 年有 50.9%(95% CI 50.4%至 51.5%)和 53.7%(95% CI 53.1%至 54.2%)的患者为新患者,第 5 年就诊中,有 35.0%(95% CI 34.5%至 35.5%)和 36.2%(95% CI 35.7%至 36.7%)为新患者。在学术型 ED,56%的患者在 5 年内仅就诊 1 次,不到 6%的患者在这段时间内就诊超过 8 次。在社区型 ED,56%的患者在 5 年内仅就诊 1 次,不到 3%的患者总体上就诊超过 8 次。
ED 为相对稳定的人群提供医疗服务,真正的新患者仅占就诊次数的少数。尽管每位患者的就诊次数较多,但就诊次数超过 8 次的患者比例很小,而且仅在一段时间内如此。就诊次数和患者不是等效的分析单位,决策者和研究人员应确定哪种单位最适合他们的决策。