Associate Professor Reshma A Merchant, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore 119228, Email:
J Frailty Aging. 2024;13(4):507-513. doi: 10.14283/jfa.2024.58.
To investigate whether direct admission to geriatric inpatient care from the emergency department (EMD) was associated with lower length of stay (LOS) and cost compared to patients admitted through an acute medical unit (AMU).
Retrospective single-centre cohort study conducted using hospital database on older patients ≥ 75 years discharged from geriatric inpatient service in a tertiary academic centre from March 2021 to September 2021 who were admitted through AMU or direct from EMD.
Traditional AMU run by internists followed by geriatrician led-care compared with geriatrician led-care.
We evaluated the difference in median length of stay (LOS), and cost using quantile regression adjusted for primary discharge diagnoses, hospital frailty risk score (HFRS) and Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI).
Among 574 older patients, 140 (24.4%) were admitted from AMU. Mean age was 84.0 ± 6.3 years and 83.8% were categorized as high or intermediate frailty risk based on HFRS. 46% of patients admitted through EMD were discharged within three days. After adjusting for primary diagnoses, HFRS, and ACCI, patients admitted through AMU had a longer median LOS of 1.6 days (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-2.4, p<0.001), higher total cost $1386.0 (95% CI 733-2038, p<0.001), laboratory cost $226.0 (95% CI 131-322, p<0.001), medication cost $65.0 (95% CI 15-115, p<0.010), physiotherapy cost $45.0 (95% CI 16-75, p=0.002) and occupational therapy cost $35.0 (95% CI 12-58, p=0.003).
Older adults admitted through AMU had significantly longer median LOS, higher total cost, physiotherapy and occupational therapy costs, medication, and laboratory costs.
探讨与通过急性内科病房(AMU)入院相比,从急诊部(ED)直接转入老年住院病房是否与较低的住院时间(LOS)和成本相关。
使用 2021 年 3 月至 9 月期间在一家三级学术中心的老年住院病房出院的年龄在 75 岁及以上的老年患者的医院数据库,对从 AMU 或直接从 ED 转入的患者进行回顾性单中心队列研究。
内科医生主导的传统 AMU 治疗,随后是老年医生主导的治疗,与老年医生主导的治疗相比。
我们使用分位数回归评估了中位数住院时间(LOS)和成本的差异,该回归调整了主要出院诊断、医院脆弱性风险评分(HFRS)和年龄调整的 Charlson 合并症指数(ACCI)。
在 574 名老年患者中,有 140 名(24.4%)从 AMU 入院。平均年龄为 84.0 ± 6.3 岁,根据 HFRS,83.8%的患者被归类为高或中度脆弱风险。46%通过 EMD 入院的患者在三天内出院。在调整了主要诊断、HFRS 和 ACCI 后,通过 AMU 入院的患者的中位 LOS 延长了 1.6 天(95%置信区间(CI):0.86-2.4,p<0.001),总费用增加了 1386.0 美元(95% CI 733-2038,p<0.001),实验室费用增加了 226.0 美元(95% CI 131-322,p<0.001),药物费用增加了 65.0 美元(95% CI 15-115,p<0.010),物理治疗费用增加了 45.0 美元(95% CI 16-75,p=0.002),职业治疗费用增加了 35.0 美元(95% CI 12-58,p=0.003)。
通过 AMU 入院的老年患者的中位 LOS 显著延长,总费用、物理治疗和职业治疗费用、药物和实验室费用更高。