Christopher Fee1, Helen Burstin, Judith H Maselli, Renee Y Hsia. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave, PO Box 0208, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. christopher.fee@ucsf.edu
Abstract
CONTEXT: Performance measures, particularly pay for performance, may have unintended consequences for safety-net institutions caring for disproportionate shares of Medicaid or uninsured patients. OBJECTIVE: To describe emergency department (ED) compliance with proposed length-of-stay measures for admissions (8 hours or 480 minutes) and discharges, transfers, and observations (4 hours or 240 minutes) by safety-net status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 2008 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) ED data were stratified by safety-net status (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition) and disposition (admission, discharge, observation, transfer). The 2008 NHAMCS is a national probability sample of 396 hospitals (90.2% unweighted response rate) and 34 134 patient records. Visits were excluded for patients younger than 18 years, missing length-of-stay data or dispositions of missing, other, left against medical advice, or dead on arrival. Median and 90th percentile ED lengths of stay were calculated for each disposition and admission/discharge subcategories (critical care, psychiatric, routine) stratified by safety-net status. Multivariable analyses determined associations with length-of-stay measure compliance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Emergency Department length-of-stay measure compliance by disposition and safety-net status. RESULTS: Of the 72.1% ED visits (N = 24 719) included in the analysis, 42.3% were to safety-net EDs and 57.7% were to non-safety-net EDs. The median length of stay for safety-net was 269 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 178-397 minutes) for admission vs 281 minutes (IQR, 178-401 minutes) for non-safety-net EDs; 156 minutes (IQR, 95-239 minutes) for discharge vs 148 minutes (IQR, 88-238 minutes); 355 minutes (IQR, 221-675 minutes) for observations vs 298 minutes (IQR, 195-440 minutes); and 235 minutes (IQR, 155-378 minutes) for transfers vs 239 minutes (IQR, 142-368 minutes). Safety-net status was not independently associated with compliance with ED length-of-stay measures; the odds ratio was 0.83 for admissions (95% CI, 0.52-1.34); 1.03 for discharges (95% CI, 0.83-1.27); 1.05 for observations (95% CI, 0.57-1.95), 1.30 for transfers (95% CI, 0.70-2.45]); or subcategories except for psychiatric discharges (1.67, [95% CI, 1.02-2.74]). CONCLUSION: Compliance with proposed ED length-of-stay measures for admissions, discharges, transfers, and observations did not differ significantly between safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals.
CONTEXT: Performance measures, particularly pay for performance, may have unintended consequences for safety-net institutions caring for disproportionate shares of Medicaid or uninsured patients. OBJECTIVE: To describe emergency department (ED) compliance with proposed length-of-stay measures for admissions (8 hours or 480 minutes) and discharges, transfers, and observations (4 hours or 240 minutes) by safety-net status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 2008 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) ED data were stratified by safety-net status (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition) and disposition (admission, discharge, observation, transfer). The 2008 NHAMCS is a national probability sample of 396 hospitals (90.2% unweighted response rate) and 34 134 patient records. Visits were excluded for patients younger than 18 years, missing length-of-stay data or dispositions of missing, other, left against medical advice, or dead on arrival. Median and 90th percentile ED lengths of stay were calculated for each disposition and admission/discharge subcategories (critical care, psychiatric, routine) stratified by safety-net status. Multivariable analyses determined associations with length-of-stay measure compliance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Emergency Department length-of-stay measure compliance by disposition and safety-net status. RESULTS: Of the 72.1% ED visits (N = 24 719) included in the analysis, 42.3% were to safety-net EDs and 57.7% were to non-safety-net EDs. The median length of stay for safety-net was 269 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 178-397 minutes) for admission vs 281 minutes (IQR, 178-401 minutes) for non-safety-net EDs; 156 minutes (IQR, 95-239 minutes) for discharge vs 148 minutes (IQR, 88-238 minutes); 355 minutes (IQR, 221-675 minutes) for observations vs 298 minutes (IQR, 195-440 minutes); and 235 minutes (IQR, 155-378 minutes) for transfers vs 239 minutes (IQR, 142-368 minutes). Safety-net status was not independently associated with compliance with ED length-of-stay measures; the odds ratio was 0.83 for admissions (95% CI, 0.52-1.34); 1.03 for discharges (95% CI, 0.83-1.27); 1.05 for observations (95% CI, 0.57-1.95), 1.30 for transfers (95% CI, 0.70-2.45]); or subcategories except for psychiatric discharges (1.67, [95% CI, 1.02-2.74]). CONCLUSION: Compliance with proposed ED length-of-stay measures for admissions, discharges, transfers, and observations did not differ significantly between safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals.
Authors: John C Moskop; David P Sklar; Joel M Geiderman; Raquel M Schears; Kelly J Bookman Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2008-11-22 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Andrew Herring; Andrew Wilper; David U Himmelstein; Steffie Woolhandler; Janice A Espinola; David F M Brown; Carlos A Camargo Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Jesse M Pines; A Russell Localio; Judd E Hollander; William G Baxt; Hoi Lee; Carolyn Phillips; Joshua P Metlay Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2007-10-03 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Jesse M Pines; Sanjay Iyer; Maureen Disbot; Judd E Hollander; Frances S Shofer; Elizabeth M Datner Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Jesse M Pines; Charles V Pollack; Deborah B Diercks; Anna Marie Chang; Frances S Shofer; Judd E Hollander Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2009-06-22 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Joseph L Smith; Alessandro S De Nadai; Eric A Storch; Barbara Langland-Orban; Etienne Pracht; John Petrila Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Candace D McNaughton; Wesley H Self; Yuwei Zhu; Alexander T Janke; Alan B Storrow; Phillip Levy Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Wendy A M H Thijssen; Nicole Kraaijvanger; Dennis G Barten; Marleen L M Boerma; Paul Giesen; Michel Wensing Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-04-26 Impact factor: 2.655