[Use and misuse of hospital admission in a department of medicine in Padua].

We evaluated retrospectively 357 consecutive inpatients (M = 157; F = 200) 14=93 wars old (mean 60.9 +/- 1.0, SF: M = 59.5 +/- 1.4: F = 61.9 +/- 1.4) treated by a same physician at the 2nd Division of Medicine, Padua University Hospital, from January 1993 to July 1995. Such Division, which is representative of the Internal Medicine of an important Center has a high medical standard, as evaluated on the basis of academical and scientific titles of its staff, but no specific geriatric facilities. Patients had been assigned to the Division and, within it, to a given physician at random. 38.1% of patients were older than 70 (M = 30.0; F = 44.5, p < 0.01). Apart from the previous group, 29.1% of admissions (M = 28.0; F = 30.0) were inappropriate. 4.5% of admissions were terminally-ill cancer patients, already diagnosed and treated at other divisions and not further susceptible of specific therapy. Only 28.3% of patients (M = 38.2; F = 20.5, p < 0.0005) did not fall within any of the previous categories, but 33% of the days of their hospital stay were inappropriate (M = 30; F = 37). The mean hospital stay was 10.2 +/- 0.5 SE days (M = 10.4 +/- 0.6; F = 10.1 +/- 0.6). Considering patients altogether, the mean hospital stay was longer for patients older than 70 than for the others (12 +/- 0.9 vs. 9.3 +/- 0.5 days, p < 0.01) and a significant correlation was observed between age and stay length (r = 0.249, p < 0.0001). The educational level of inpatients was as follows: no education and elementary 65.8%; junior-high 20.7%; high 8.9%; university 4.4% with no difference between sexes, nor as compared to the general population, adjusted for age. It is concluded that a highly qualified division, to which it would appear appropriate applying only for cases not manageable as outpatients or by less qualified institutions, is suboptimally utilized with waste of money and resources. This is due to a deficiency in geriatric and residential facilities as well as in community and domiciliary care, to a noxious culture subordinating internal medicine to specialty branches and to the inadequate use of resources by both physicians and patients, in particular, among them, by females.