Rama A Salhi1, J Matthew Edwards2, David F Gaieski2, Roger A Band2, Benjamin S Abella2, Brendan G Carr3. 1. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Center for Policy Research, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: carrb@upenn.edu.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Collective knowledge and coordination of vital interventions for time-sensitive conditions (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI], stroke, cardiac arrest, and septic shock) could contribute to a comprehensive statewide emergency care system, but little is known about population access to the resources required. We seek to describe existing clinical management strategies for time-sensitive conditions in Pennsylvania hospitals. METHODS: All Pennsylvania emergency departments (EDs) open in 2009 were surveyed about resource availability and practice patterns for time-sensitive conditions. The frequency with which EDs provided essential clinical bundles for each condition was assessed. Penalized maximum likelihood regressions were used to evaluate associations between ED characteristics and the presence of the 4 clinical bundles of care. We used geographic information science to calculate 60-minute ambulance access to the nearest facility with these clinical bundles. RESULTS: The percentage of EDs providing each of the 4 clinical bundles in 2009 ranged from 20% to 57% (stroke 20%, STEMI 32%, cardiac arrest 34%, sepsis 57%). For STEMI and stroke, presence of a board-certified/board-eligible emergency physician was significantly associated with presence of a clinical bundle. Only 8% of hospitals provided all 4 care bundles. However, 53% of the population was able to reach this minority of hospitals within 60 minutes. CONCLUSION: Reliably matching patient needs to ED resources in time-dependent illness is a critical component of a coordinated emergency care system. Population access to critical interventions for the time-dependent diseases discussed here is limited. A population-based planning approach and improved coordination of care could improve access to interventions for patients with time-sensitive conditions.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Collective knowledge and coordination of vital interventions for time-sensitive conditions (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI], stroke, cardiac arrest, and septic shock) could contribute to a comprehensive statewide emergency care system, but little is known about population access to the resources required. We seek to describe existing clinical management strategies for time-sensitive conditions in Pennsylvania hospitals. METHODS: All Pennsylvania emergency departments (EDs) open in 2009 were surveyed about resource availability and practice patterns for time-sensitive conditions. The frequency with which EDs provided essential clinical bundles for each condition was assessed. Penalized maximum likelihood regressions were used to evaluate associations between ED characteristics and the presence of the 4 clinical bundles of care. We used geographic information science to calculate 60-minute ambulance access to the nearest facility with these clinical bundles. RESULTS: The percentage of EDs providing each of the 4 clinical bundles in 2009 ranged from 20% to 57% (stroke 20%, STEMI 32%, cardiac arrest 34%, sepsis 57%). For STEMI and stroke, presence of a board-certified/board-eligible emergency physician was significantly associated with presence of a clinical bundle. Only 8% of hospitals provided all 4 care bundles. However, 53% of the population was able to reach this minority of hospitals within 60 minutes. CONCLUSION: Reliably matching patient needs to ED resources in time-dependent illness is a critical component of a coordinated emergency care system. Population access to critical interventions for the time-dependent diseases discussed here is limited. A population-based planning approach and improved coordination of care could improve access to interventions for patients with time-sensitive conditions.
Authors: Michael J Ward; Sunil Kripalani; Alan B Storrow; Dandan Liu; Theodore Speroff; Michael Matheny; Eric J Thomassee; Timothy J Vogus; Daniel Munoz; Carol Scott; Joseph L Fredi; Robert S Dittus Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Beomjin Park; Woori Bae; Hyo Joon Kim; Jee Yong Lim; Sang Hoon Oh; Chun Song Youn; Han Joon Kim; Kyu Nam Park; Hwan Song Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 4.093
Authors: Nicholas M Mohr; Karisa K Harland; Dan M Shane; Azeemuddin Ahmed; Brian M Fuller; James C Torner Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Francisco Martín-Rodríguez; Laura Melero-Guijarro; Guillermo J Ortega; Ancor Sanz-García; Teresa de la Torre de Dios; Jesús Álvarez Manzanares; José L Martín-Conty; Miguel A Castro Villamor; Juan F Delgado Benito; Raúl López-Izquierdo Journal: Dis Markers Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 3.434
Authors: Nicholas M Mohr; Karisa K Harland; Uche E Okoro; Brian M Fuller; Kalyn Campbell; Morgan B Swanson; Stephen Q Simpson; Edith A Parker; Luke J Mack; Amanda Bell; Katie DeJong; Brett Faine; Anne Zepeski; Keith Mueller; Elizabeth Chrischilles; Christopher R Carpenter; Michael P Jones; Marcia M Ward Journal: J Comp Eff Res Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 1.744