Fruhan Scott, Bills Corey B
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA
BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 1;11(12):e053918. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053918.
Previous studies have assessed patient-level characteristics associated with emergency department (ED) return visits, but none have used provider assessment. We prospectively investigate whether clinical providers could accurately predict ED return visits.
Prospective cohort study.
Single academically affiliated urban county hospital.
Discharged ED patients over a 14-month period with a provider assessment of the likelihood of patient return within 7 days of ED discharge.
The primary outcome of interest was a return visit to the ED within 7 days. Additional outcome measures included a return visit within 72 hours and a return visit resulting in admission. We also measured the accuracy of provider gestalt, and provide measures of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios.
Of the 11 922 ED discharges included in this study, providers expected 2116 (17.7%) to result in a return visit within 7 days. Providers were much more likely to perceive a return visit if the patient left against medical advice (OR: 5.97, 95% CI: 4.67 to 7.62), or was homeless (OR: 5.69, 95% CI: 5.14 to 6.29). Patients who actually returned were also more likely to be homeless, English speaking and to have left the ED against medical advice on the initial encounter. The strongest predictor of a return visit at both 72 hours and 7 days in multivariable modelling was provider assessment (OR: 3.77, 95% CI: 3.25 to 4.37; OR: 3.72, 95% CI: 3.29 to 4.21, respectively). Overall sensitivity and specificity of provider gestalt as a measure of patient return within 7 days were 47% and 87%, respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 3.51 and 0.61, respectively.
Clinician assessment was the strongest predictor of a return visit in this dataset. Clinician assessment may be used as a way to screen patients during the index visit and enrol them in efforts to decrease return visits.
既往研究评估了与急诊科复诊相关的患者层面特征,但均未采用医护人员评估。我们前瞻性地调查临床医护人员能否准确预测急诊科复诊情况。
前瞻性队列研究。
一家隶属于学术机构的城市县级医院。
在14个月期间内从急诊科出院的患者,并由医护人员评估其在急诊科出院后7天内复诊的可能性。
主要关注的结局是在7天内返回急诊科复诊。其他结局指标包括在72小时内复诊以及复诊后入院。我们还测量了医护人员总体印象的准确性,并提供了敏感性、特异性、预测值和似然比的测量结果。
本研究纳入的11922例急诊科出院患者中,医护人员预计有2116例(17.7%)会在7天内复诊。如果患者拒绝医嘱出院(比值比:5.97,95%置信区间:4.67至7.62)或无家可归(比值比:5.69,95%置信区间:5.14至6.29),医护人员更有可能认为患者会复诊。实际复诊的患者也更有可能无家可归、说英语且在初次就诊时拒绝医嘱出院。在多变量模型中,72小时和7天时复诊的最强预测因素是医护人员评估(比值比分别为:3.77,95%置信区间:3.25至4.37;3.72,95%置信区间:3.29至4.21)。作为7天内患者复诊指标的医护人员总体印象的总体敏感性和特异性分别为47%和87%。阳性和阴性似然比分别为3.51和0.61。
在该数据集中,临床医生评估是复诊的最强预测因素。临床医生评估可作为在首次就诊时筛选患者的一种方法,并让他们参与减少复诊的工作。