Department of Health Services Research, and CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Aging and Long Term Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Department of Internal Medicine, Máxima Medical Centre, Postbox 90052, 5600 PD, Veldhoven/Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
BMC Emerg Med. 2019 Jul 26;19(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12873-019-0257-y.
The demand on Emergency Departments and acute medical services is increasing internationally, creating pressure on health systems and negatively influencing the quality of delivered care. Visible consequences of the increased demand on acute services is crowding and queuing. This manifests as delays in the Emergency Departments, adverse clinical outcomes and poor patient experience.
Despite the similarities in the UK's and Dutch health care systems, such as universal health coverage, there are differences in the number of patients presenting at the Emergency Departments and the burden of crowding between these countries. Given the similarities in funding, this paper explores the similarities and differences in the organisational structure of acute care in the UK and the Netherlands. In the Netherlands, less patients are seen at the ED than in England and the admission rate is higher. GPs and so-called GP-posts serve 24/7 as gatekeepers in acute care, but EDs are heterogeneously organised. In the UK, the acute care system has a number of different access points and the accessibility of GPs seems to be suboptimal. Acute ambulatory care may relieve the pressure from EDs and Acute Medical Units. In both countries the ageing population leads to a changing case mix at the ED with an increased amount of multimorbid patients with polypharmacy, requiring generalistic and multidisciplinary care.
The acute and emergency care in the Netherlands and the UK face similar challenges. We believe that each system has strengths that the other can learn from. The Netherlands may benefit from an acute ambulatory care system and the UK by optimizing the accessibility of GPs 24/7 and improving signposting for urgent care services. In both countries the changing case mix at the ED needs doctors who are superspecialists instead of subspecialists. Finally, to improve the organisation of health care, doctors need to be visible medical leaders and participate in the organisation of care.
国际上对急诊科和急性医疗服务的需求不断增加,给卫生系统带来压力,并对所提供的护理质量产生负面影响。急性服务需求增加的明显后果是拥挤和排队。这表现为急诊科的延误、不良的临床结果和较差的患者体验。
尽管英国和荷兰的医疗保健系统相似,例如全民健康保险,但两国在急诊科就诊的患者数量和拥挤程度方面存在差异。鉴于资金相似,本文探讨了英国和荷兰急性护理组织结构的相似点和不同点。在荷兰,到急诊科就诊的患者比英国少,住院率更高。全科医生和所谓的全科医生岗位 24 小时作为急性护理的把关人,但急诊科的组织形式却各不相同。在英国,急性护理系统有多个不同的准入点,全科医生的可及性似乎并不理想。急性门诊护理可以减轻急诊科和急性内科病房的压力。在这两个国家,人口老龄化导致急诊科的病例组合发生变化,患有多种疾病且服用多种药物的多病患者增多,需要进行全科和多学科护理。
荷兰和英国的急性和急诊护理面临着类似的挑战。我们相信,每个系统都有其他系统可以借鉴的优势。荷兰可能受益于急性门诊护理系统,英国可以通过优化全科医生 24 小时的可及性和改善紧急护理服务的转介来获益。在这两个国家,急诊科的病例组合都需要专科医生而不是亚专科医生。最后,为了改善医疗保健的组织,医生需要成为可见的医疗领导者并参与护理的组织。