Lien Kelly, Grattan Barrett A, Reynard Alexandra L, Peters Jocelynn, Parr Jennifer L
Family Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, CAN.
Cureus. 2020 Feb 16;12(2):e7008. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7008.
Introduction Close outpatient follow-up with a specialist or family physician post-discharge from the emergency department (ED) has been shown to increase adherence to antihypertensive medications, decrease mortality in heart failure, and reduce the odds of myocardial infarction or death after ED presentation for chest pain. A Canadian study demonstrated that 21% of patients who left the ED with a new diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or hypertension were not seen by a physician within 30 days. There is a paucity of research investigating why this follow-up does not occur. This study aimed to elucidate factors that are associated with outpatient follow-up by a family physician clinic following discharge from a local Canadian community emergency department. Methods A retrospective chart review of patients rostered to a family physician who presented to the community ED in the past two years was conducted. The primary outcome examined was a documented follow-up visit with any physician at the clinic within 30 days of the index ED visit. Patients aged 18 or older at the time of the initial ED visit were eligible for inclusion in the study. Exclusion criteria were the following: patients aged 17 or younger at the time of the initial ED visit, those who were not fully assessed at ED visit (i.e., left against medical advice), those whose charts corresponding to the ED visit were unable to be found, patients who were admitted to any facility within 30 days of ED visit, and patients who died within 30 days of the ED visit. Variables of interest extracted from the ED chart and clinic electronic medical record were the following: Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) score, documented discharge instructions, age, sex, primary residence distance from the clinic, last documented clinic visit before ED visit, and the date of and presenting complaint of the next clinic visit after the ED visit. Data were collected as continuous and categorical variables. Descriptive statistics were used to show the number and percentages of patients who followed up in clinic. Binomial regression analysis was used to determine if a specific variable was associated with patient follow-up. Inter-rater reliability between data abstractors was calculated using Fleiss Κ. An alpha-value of 0.05 was chosen, and SPSS version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) was used for all statistical analyses. Results A total of 234 patients out of 1292 patients met inclusion criteria. 53% of patients were female, and the mean age was 50. Seventy-two (31%) received discharge instructions from the ED physician to follow up with their family doctor. In total, 93 of the 234 patients proceeded to have a documented clinic visit within 30 days (40%). 52% (n = 48) of these were women. Receiving specific discharge instructions increased the adjusted odds of follow-up (OR 3.07, 95% CI: 1.64-5.76; P < 0.05). Patients who followed up also tended to have been seen in clinic in the last three months, but this was not statistically significant. Conclusion Receiving specific discharge instructions to follow-up increased the odds that patients followed up with their family physician after discharge from the ED. ED physicians may consider giving explicit instructions to patients to improve monitoring of ongoing clinical issues. More research needs to be conducted on how to improve transitions of care. Countries with different healthcare models may have other barriers to appropriate follow-up.
引言
急诊科(ED)出院后由专科医生或家庭医生进行密切的门诊随访,已被证明可提高抗高血压药物的依从性、降低心力衰竭死亡率,并降低因胸痛到急诊科就诊后发生心肌梗死或死亡的几率。一项加拿大研究表明,21%新诊断为心房颤动、心力衰竭或高血压而出院的患者在30天内未接受医生诊治。关于为何未进行这种随访的研究很少。本研究旨在阐明加拿大当地社区急诊科出院后与家庭医生诊所门诊随访相关的因素。
方法
对过去两年到社区急诊科就诊且已登记到家庭医生名下的患者进行回顾性病历审查。主要观察指标是在首次急诊科就诊后30天内到诊所接受任何医生的记录在案的随访。首次急诊科就诊时年龄在18岁及以上的患者符合纳入本研究的条件。排除标准如下:首次急诊科就诊时年龄在17岁及以下的患者、在急诊科就诊时未得到充分评估的患者(即自行离院)、无法找到与急诊科就诊对应的病历的患者、在急诊科就诊后30天内入住任何医疗机构的患者,以及在急诊科就诊后30天内死亡的患者。从急诊科病历和诊所电子病历中提取的感兴趣变量如下:加拿大分诊和 acuity 量表(CTAS)评分、记录在案的出院指导、年龄、性别、主要居住地与诊所的距离、急诊科就诊前最后一次记录在案的诊所就诊情况,以及急诊科就诊后下一次诊所就诊的日期和主诉。数据作为连续变量和分类变量收集。描述性统计用于显示在诊所随访的患者数量和百分比。二项式回归分析用于确定特定变量是否与患者随访相关。使用Fleiss Κ计算数据提取者之间的评分者间信度。选择α值为0.05,并使用SPSS 25.0版(IBM公司,纽约州阿蒙克)进行所有统计分析。
结果
1292例患者中有234例符合纳入标准。53%的患者为女性,平均年龄为50岁。72例(31%)患者收到急诊科医生的出院指导,要求其随访家庭医生。在这234例患者中,共有93例(40%)在30天内进行了记录在案的诊所就诊。其中52%(n = 4)为女性。收到特定的出院指导增加了随访的调整后几率(比值比3.07,95%置信区间:1.64 - 5.76;P < 0.05)。进行随访的患者在过去三个月也往往在诊所就诊过,但这在统计学上不显著。
结论
收到关于随访的特定出院指导增加了患者在急诊科出院后到家庭医生处随访的几率。急诊科医生可考虑向患者给出明确指导,以改善对持续临床问题的监测。关于如何改善医疗护理过渡还需要进行更多研究。不同医疗模式的国家在适当随访方面可能存在其他障碍。