Literature DB >> 10569389

Fast track and the pediatric emergency department: resource utilization and patients outcomes.

L C Hampers1, S Cha, D J Gutglass, H J Binns, S E Krug.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in the evaluation, management, and outcomes for patients seen in an on-site "fast track" (FT) vs the main ED.
METHODS: Over a three-month period, patients presenting to an urban pediatric ED were prospectively assessed. Patients included were: triaged as "nonurgent"; aged 2 months to 10 years; not chronically ill; and had fever, or complaint of vomiting, diarrhea, or decreased oral intake. Evening and weekend care was provided in the FT; at all other times these low-acuity patients were seen in the ED. Seven days after the visit, families were interviewed by telephone.
RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-nine and 557 patients were seen in the FT and ED, respectively. The patients in the two settings did not differ in age, clinical condition, race, or commercial insurance status. Patient mean test charges were $27 and $52 for the FT and ED, respectively (p < 0.01). Twenty-four percent of the FT patients vs 41% of the ED patients had tests performed (p < 0.01). Average length of stay was 28 minutes shorter in the FT (95% CI = 19 to 36, p < 0.01). Follow-up was completed for 480 of 755 families with telephones (64%). The FT and ED patients did not differ at follow-up: 90% vs 88% had improved conditions (p = 0.53), 18% vs 15% had received unscheduled follow-up care (p = 0.44), and 94% of the families in both groups were satisfied with the visit (p = 0.98).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with those in the main ED, the study patients seen in the FT had fewer tests ordered and had briefer lengths of stay. These findings were not explained by differences in patient ages, vital signs, or demographic characteristics. No difference in final outcomes or satisfaction was detected among the families contacted for follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10569389     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00119.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  6 in total

1.  The effect of a separate stream for minor injuries on accident and emergency department waiting times.

Authors:  M W Cooke; S Wilson; S Pearson
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  [An approach to acute diseases using a nursing practice guide].

Authors:  Alba Brugués Brugués; Antoni Peris Grao; Laurentino Martí Aguasca; Gemma Flores Mateo
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.137

3.  The efficacy and value of emergency medicine: a supportive literature review.

Authors:  C James Holliman; Terrence M Mulligan; Robert E Suter; Peter Cameron; Lee Wallis; Philip D Anderson; Kathleen Clem
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2011-07-22

4.  Community-based urgent care in Israel and worldwide.

Authors:  Deena R Zimmerman
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2013-10-23

5.  Influence of social characteristics on use of paediatric emergency care in Sweden - a questionnaire based study.

Authors:  Julia Ellbrant; Jonas Åkeson; Jenny Eckner; Pia Karlsland Åkeson
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2018-12-27

6.  Use of a Semiautomatic Text Message System to Improve Satisfaction With Wait Time in the Adult Emergency Department: Cross-sectional Survey Study.

Authors:  Frederic Ehrler; Jessica Rochat; Johan N Siebert; Idris Guessous; Christian Lovis; Hervé Spechbach
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2022-09-06
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.