Evaluation of the Costs and Consequences of Implementing an Optimization Process for Low-Complexity Emergency Care: The LINEA Program.

IF 2.3 Q2 ECONOMICS
Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2025-05-30 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.36469/001c.130031
German Devia-Jaramillo, Nathalia Esmeral-Zuluaga, Juan Pablo Vargas-Gallo, Rafael Alfonso-Cristancho
{"title":"Evaluation of the Costs and Consequences of Implementing an Optimization Process for Low-Complexity Emergency Care: The LINEA Program.","authors":"German Devia-Jaramillo, Nathalia Esmeral-Zuluaga, Juan Pablo Vargas-Gallo, Rafael Alfonso-Cristancho","doi":"10.36469/001c.130031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Overcrowding is persistent in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide and can result in adverse patient outcomes and prolonged lengths of stay. Delays in care and unmet demand contribute to negative outcomes for patients awaiting treatment, including increased morbidity and mortality, prolonged hospital stays, and overall lower quality of medical care. Overcrowding in EDs not only diminishes patient satisfaction with the entire hospitalization experience, beyond the ED, but also significantly increases healthcare costs and contributes to a rise in medical errors. Therefore, developing strategies that optimize the limited resources available for emergency patient care, especially for those with low-complexity emergencies, is crucial. <b>Objective:</b> To evaluate whether implementing a specific care strategy for patients with low-complexity emergencies can effectively reduce costs and improve clinical outcomes and patient-reported experiences compared with standard care practices. <b>Methods:</b> A cost-consequence model was employed to separately evaluate the costs and outcomes of each alternative. The cost and outcome analyses were applied to healthcare services using the database of a tertiary-level ED, analyzed from the perspective of the healthcare service provider over a 2-year time horizon. To assess the perspective of the healthcare provider institution, the cost-consequence analysis was conducted using a decision tree model. <b>Results:</b> The study included 43 268 patients. No significant differences were found in demographic variables between groups. A significant difference was found in total length of stay in minutes between groups: minimum (median interquartile range [IQR]), 534 (456-644) vs 494 (364-719) (<i>P</i> < .001). In addition, there was an improvement in the NPS value from 44 to 53 throughout the ED, with 0.005% mortality in the study group and 0.07 in the control group (<i>P</i> < .001). Finally, a significant difference was documented in the mean billing per patient, with a median (IQR) of Col <math><mn>255</mn> <mrow><mo> </mo></mrow> <mn>903</mn> <mo>(</mo> <mi>C</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>l</mi></math> 151 108-Col <math><mn>658</mn> <mrow><mo> </mo></mrow> <mn>585</mn> <mo>)</mo> <mi>v</mi> <mi>s</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>h</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>c</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>m</mi> <mi>p</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>s</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>n</mi> <mi>g</mi> <mi>r</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>u</mi> <mi>p</mi> <mi>a</mi> <mi>n</mi> <mi>d</mi> <mi>C</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>l</mi></math> 283 922 (Col <math><mn>125</mn> <mrow><mo> </mo></mrow> <mn>998</mn> <mo>-</mo> <mi>C</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>l</mi></math> 776 097) (<i>P</i> < .018). <b>Conclusion:</b> The implementation of a specialized unit for the care of patients with low-complexity emergencies within the ED has proven effective in improving total patient length of stay. This significantly contributes to reducing overcrowding, decreasing mortality, and reducing unmet demand. As a result, there is an overall improvement in user satisfaction within the ED.</p>","PeriodicalId":16012,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"207-212"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12127021/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.130031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Overcrowding is persistent in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide and can result in adverse patient outcomes and prolonged lengths of stay. Delays in care and unmet demand contribute to negative outcomes for patients awaiting treatment, including increased morbidity and mortality, prolonged hospital stays, and overall lower quality of medical care. Overcrowding in EDs not only diminishes patient satisfaction with the entire hospitalization experience, beyond the ED, but also significantly increases healthcare costs and contributes to a rise in medical errors. Therefore, developing strategies that optimize the limited resources available for emergency patient care, especially for those with low-complexity emergencies, is crucial. Objective: To evaluate whether implementing a specific care strategy for patients with low-complexity emergencies can effectively reduce costs and improve clinical outcomes and patient-reported experiences compared with standard care practices. Methods: A cost-consequence model was employed to separately evaluate the costs and outcomes of each alternative. The cost and outcome analyses were applied to healthcare services using the database of a tertiary-level ED, analyzed from the perspective of the healthcare service provider over a 2-year time horizon. To assess the perspective of the healthcare provider institution, the cost-consequence analysis was conducted using a decision tree model. Results: The study included 43 268 patients. No significant differences were found in demographic variables between groups. A significant difference was found in total length of stay in minutes between groups: minimum (median interquartile range [IQR]), 534 (456-644) vs 494 (364-719) (P < .001). In addition, there was an improvement in the NPS value from 44 to 53 throughout the ED, with 0.005% mortality in the study group and 0.07 in the control group (P < .001). Finally, a significant difference was documented in the mean billing per patient, with a median (IQR) of Col 255 903 ( C o l 151 108-Col 658 585 ) v s t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p a n d C o l 283 922 (Col 125 998 - C o l 776 097) (P < .018). Conclusion: The implementation of a specialized unit for the care of patients with low-complexity emergencies within the ED has proven effective in improving total patient length of stay. This significantly contributes to reducing overcrowding, decreasing mortality, and reducing unmet demand. As a result, there is an overall improvement in user satisfaction within the ED.

实施低复杂性急诊护理优化过程的成本和后果评估:LINEA项目。
简介:世界各地的急诊科(EDs)一直存在人满为患的问题,并可能导致不良的患者预后和住院时间延长。护理延误和未满足的需求会导致等待治疗的患者出现负面结果,包括发病率和死亡率增加、住院时间延长以及总体医疗质量下降。急诊室人满为患不仅降低了患者对整个住院体验的满意度,而且还显著增加了医疗成本,并导致医疗差错的增加。因此,制定战略,优化现有的有限资源,用于紧急病人护理,特别是那些低复杂性的紧急情况,是至关重要的。目的:评估与标准护理实践相比,对低复杂性急诊患者实施特定护理策略是否能有效降低成本,改善临床结果和患者报告的体验。方法:采用成本-后果模型分别评价各方案的成本和结果。成本和结果分析应用于使用三级ED数据库的医疗保健服务,从医疗保健服务提供者的角度在2年时间范围内进行分析。为了评估医疗保健提供者机构的观点,使用决策树模型进行了成本-后果分析。结果:纳入43 268例患者。组间人口统计学变量无显著差异。总长度的显著差异被发现在分钟组:最低(中位四分位范围(差)),534(456 - 644)和494 (364 - 719)(P P 255 903 (C o l 151 108 -坳658 585)v s t h e C o m P r i s o n g r o u P n d C o l 283 922(坳125 998 - C o l 776 097) (P结论:专业化的实现单元的低突发事件在ED患者已经被证明有效的改善病人住院时间。这大大有助于减少过度拥挤、降低死亡率和减少未满足的需求。因此,在ED内的用户满意度有了全面的提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信