OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a definition of frequent use of an emergency department (ED) by comparing differences in the observed frequency distribution with that of a theoretical frequency distribution. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of attendance of ED and minor injury unit attendances in one city over 1 year was conducted. From these data, the expected frequency distribution was determined based upon a Poisson distribution. RESULTS: During the period studied, 75,141 people attended on 98,908 occasions. The theoretical frequency distribution showed that there were 2764 (3.7%) "frequent users" presenting repeatedly due to non-random events. These patients made 12,316 (12.4%) attendances. Frequent users were older than chance users (mean age 49.7 vs 44.5 years). A greater proportion arrived by ambulance (55.3% vs 27.5%), presented with psychiatric problems (5.8% vs 1.1%) or alcohol intoxication (1.3% vs 0.5%), and were admitted to hospital (37.4% vs 19.6%). CONCLUSION: We have identified that there is a group of patients who present repeatedly due to non-random events, confirming the existence of "frequent users". Their characteristics are clearly different to other patients in the ED. We propose that "frequent users" be defined as any patient who makes more than four attendances per year.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a definition of frequent use of an emergency department (ED) by comparing differences in the observed frequency distribution with that of a theoretical frequency distribution. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of attendance of ED and minor injury unit attendances in one city over 1 year was conducted. From these data, the expected frequency distribution was determined based upon a Poisson distribution. RESULTS: During the period studied, 75,141 people attended on 98,908 occasions. The theoretical frequency distribution showed that there were 2764 (3.7%) "frequent users" presenting repeatedly due to non-random events. These patients made 12,316 (12.4%) attendances. Frequent users were older than chance users (mean age 49.7 vs 44.5 years). A greater proportion arrived by ambulance (55.3% vs 27.5%), presented with psychiatric problems (5.8% vs 1.1%) or alcohol intoxication (1.3% vs 0.5%), and were admitted to hospital (37.4% vs 19.6%). CONCLUSION: We have identified that there is a group of patients who present repeatedly due to non-random events, confirming the existence of "frequent users". Their characteristics are clearly different to other patients in the ED. We propose that "frequent users" be defined as any patient who makes more than four attendances per year.
Authors: E R Williams; E Guthrie; K Mackway-Jones; M James; B Tomenson; J Eastham; D McNally Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Molly Byrne; Andrew William Murphy; Patrick K Plunkett; Hannah M McGee; Alistair Murray; Gerard Bury Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Stephanie Ngo; Mohammad Shahsahebi; Sean Schreiber; Fred Johnson; Mina Silberberg Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Joshua R Vest; Hongwei Zhao; Jon Jasperson; Jon Jaspserson; Larry D Gamm; Robert L Ohsfeldt Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Hannah J Kimmel; Yanick N Brice; Thomas A Trikalinos; Indra Neil Sarkar; Megan L Ranney Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Cai Lei Matsumoto; Teresa O'Driscoll; Sharen Madden; Brittany Blakelock; Jennifer Lawrance; Len Kelly Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Steven Howard Saef; Christine Marie Carr; Jeffrey S Bush; Marc T Bartman; Adam B Sendor; Wenle Zhao; Zemin Su; Jingwen Zhang; Justin Marsden; J Christophe Arnaud; Cathy L Melvin; Leslie Lenert; William P Moran; Patrick D Mauldin; Jihad S Obeid Journal: South Med J Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 0.954