Atzema Clare L, Yu Bing, Ivers Noah M, Rochon Paula A, Lee Douglas S, Schull Michael J, Austin Peter C
*Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences,University of Toronto,Toronto ON.
CJEM. 2018 May;20(3):377-391. doi: 10.1017/cem.2017.371. Epub 2017 Aug 14.
Patients with cardiovascular diseases are common in the emergency department (ED), and continuity of care following that visit is needed to ensure that they receive evidence-based diagnostic tests and therapy. We examined the frequency of follow-up care after discharge from an ED with a new diagnosis of one of three cardiovascular diseases.
We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with a new diagnosis of heart failure, atrial fibrillation, or hypertension, who were discharged from 157 non-pediatric EDs in Ontario, Canada, between April 2007 and March 2014. We determined the frequency of follow-up care with a family physician, cardiologist, or internist within seven and 30 days, and assessed the association of patient, emergency physician, and family physician characteristics with obtaining follow-up care using cause-specific hazard modeling.
There were 41,485 qualifying ED visits. Just under half (47.0%) had follow-up care within seven days, with 78.7% seen by 30 days. Patients with serious comorbidities (renal failure, dementia, COPD, stroke, coronary artery disease, and cancer) had a lower adjusted hazard of obtaining 7-day follow-up care (HRs 0.77-0.95) and 30-day follow-up care (HR 0.76-0.95). The only emergency physician characteristic associated with follow-up care was 5-year emergency medicine specialty training (HR 1.11). Compared to those whose family physician was remunerated via a primarily fee-for-service model, patients were less likely to obtain 7-day follow-up care if their family physician was remunerated via three types of capitation models (HR 0.72, 0.81, 0.85) or via traditional fee-for-service (HR 0.91). Findings were similar for 30-day follow-up care.
Only half of patients discharged from an ED with a new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and hypertension were seen within a week of being discharged. Patients with significant comorbidities were less likely to obtain follow-up care, as were those with a family physician who was remunerated via primarily capitation methods.
心血管疾病患者在急诊科很常见,就诊后需要持续护理以确保他们接受循证诊断检查和治疗。我们研究了因新诊断出三种心血管疾病之一而从急诊科出院后的随访护理频率。
我们对2007年4月至2014年3月期间从加拿大安大略省157家非儿科急诊科出院的新诊断为心力衰竭、心房颤动或高血压的患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究。我们确定了在7天和30天内接受家庭医生、心脏病专家或内科医生随访护理的频率,并使用特定病因风险模型评估了患者、急诊医生和家庭医生特征与获得随访护理之间的关联。
共有41485次符合条件的急诊科就诊。不到一半(47.0%)的患者在7天内接受了随访护理,30天内接受随访护理的比例为78.7%。患有严重合并症(肾衰竭、痴呆、慢性阻塞性肺疾病、中风、冠状动脉疾病和癌症)的患者获得7天随访护理(风险比0.77 - 0.95)和30天随访护理(风险比0.76 - 0.95)的调整后风险较低。与随访护理相关的唯一急诊医生特征是5年急诊医学专科培训(风险比1.11)。与家庭医生主要通过按服务收费模式获得报酬的患者相比,如果家庭医生通过三种按人头付费模式(风险比0.72、0.81、0.85)或传统按服务收费(风险比0.91)获得报酬,患者获得7天随访护理的可能性较小。30天随访护理的结果相似。
因新诊断为心房颤动、心力衰竭和高血压而从急诊科出院的患者中,只有一半在出院后一周内接受了随访。患有严重合并症的患者以及家庭医生主要通过按人头付费方式获得报酬的患者获得随访护理的可能性较小。