Factors associated with inappropriate use of emergency departments: findings from a cross-sectional national study in France

D. Naouri, G. Ranchon, A. Vuagnat, Jeannot Schmidt, C. El Khoury, Y. Yordanov
{"title":"Factors associated with inappropriate use of emergency departments: findings from a cross-sectional national study in France","authors":"D. Naouri, G. Ranchon, A. Vuagnat, Jeannot Schmidt, C. El Khoury, Y. Yordanov","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Inappropriate visits to emergency departments (EDs) could represent from 20% to 40% of all visits. Inappropriate use is a burden on healthcare costs and increases the risk of ED overcrowding. The aim of this study was to explore socioeconomic and geographical determinants of inappropriate ED use in France. Method The French Emergency Survey was a nationwide cross-sectional survey conducted on June 11 2013, simultaneously in all EDs in France and covered characteristics of patients, EDs and counties. The survey included 48 711 patient questionnaires and 734 ED questionnaires. We focused on adult patients (≥15 years old). The appropriateness of the ED visit was assessed by three measures: caring physician appreciation of appropriateness (numeric scale), caring physician appreciation of whether or not the patient could have been managed by a general practitioner and ED resource utilisation. Descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression were used to examine determinants of inappropriate ED use, estimating adjusted ORs and 95% CIs. Results Among the 29 407 patients in our sample, depending on the measuring method, 13.5% to 27.4% ED visits were considered inappropriate. Regardless of the measure method used, likelihood of inappropriate use decreased with older age and distance from home to the ED >10 km. Not having a private supplementary health insurance, having universal supplementary health coverage and symptoms being several days old increased the likelihood of inappropriate use. Likelihood of inappropriate use was not associated with county medical density. Conclusion Inappropriate ED use appeared associated with socioeconomic vulnerability (such as not having supplementary health coverage or having universal coverage) but not with geographical characteristics. It makes us question the appropriateness of the concept of inappropriate ED use as it does not consider the distress experienced by the patient, and segments of society seem to have few other choices to access healthcare than the ED.","PeriodicalId":49653,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","volume":"29 1","pages":"449 - 464"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009396","citationCount":"40","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Safety in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 40

Abstract

Background Inappropriate visits to emergency departments (EDs) could represent from 20% to 40% of all visits. Inappropriate use is a burden on healthcare costs and increases the risk of ED overcrowding. The aim of this study was to explore socioeconomic and geographical determinants of inappropriate ED use in France. Method The French Emergency Survey was a nationwide cross-sectional survey conducted on June 11 2013, simultaneously in all EDs in France and covered characteristics of patients, EDs and counties. The survey included 48 711 patient questionnaires and 734 ED questionnaires. We focused on adult patients (≥15 years old). The appropriateness of the ED visit was assessed by three measures: caring physician appreciation of appropriateness (numeric scale), caring physician appreciation of whether or not the patient could have been managed by a general practitioner and ED resource utilisation. Descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression were used to examine determinants of inappropriate ED use, estimating adjusted ORs and 95% CIs. Results Among the 29 407 patients in our sample, depending on the measuring method, 13.5% to 27.4% ED visits were considered inappropriate. Regardless of the measure method used, likelihood of inappropriate use decreased with older age and distance from home to the ED >10 km. Not having a private supplementary health insurance, having universal supplementary health coverage and symptoms being several days old increased the likelihood of inappropriate use. Likelihood of inappropriate use was not associated with county medical density. Conclusion Inappropriate ED use appeared associated with socioeconomic vulnerability (such as not having supplementary health coverage or having universal coverage) but not with geographical characteristics. It makes us question the appropriateness of the concept of inappropriate ED use as it does not consider the distress experienced by the patient, and segments of society seem to have few other choices to access healthcare than the ED.
与急诊室使用不当相关的因素:来自法国横断面国家研究的结果
背景不适当的急诊就诊可能占所有就诊的20%至40%。不适当的使用是医疗费用的负担,并增加ED过度拥挤的风险。本研究的目的是探讨法国不适当使用ED的社会经济和地理决定因素。方法法国急诊调查是2013年6月11日在法国所有急诊科同时进行的一项全国性横断面调查,涵盖了患者、急诊科和各县的特点。调查包括48 711份患者问卷和734份ED问卷。我们关注的是成年患者(≥15岁)。ED就诊的适当性通过三项指标进行评估:护理医生对适当性的评价(数字量表)、护理医生对患者是否可以由全科医生管理的评价以及ED资源利用率。使用描述性统计和多水平逻辑回归来检查ED使用不当的决定因素,估计调整后的OR和95%CI。结果在29 在我们的样本中,407名患者,根据测量方法,13.5%-27.4%的急诊就诊被认为是不合适的。无论使用何种测量方法,随着年龄的增长和离家到ED的距离>10,不适当使用的可能性都会降低 没有私人补充健康保险,有普遍的补充健康保险和几天前的症状增加了不适当使用的可能性。不适当使用的可能性与县医疗密度无关。结论ED使用不当与社会经济脆弱性(如没有补充医疗保险或全民医疗保险)有关,但与地理特征无关。这让我们质疑不适当使用ED这一概念的适当性,因为它没有考虑到患者所经历的痛苦,而且社会阶层似乎除了ED之外,几乎没有其他选择可以获得医疗保健。
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
Quality & Safety in Health Care
Quality & Safety in Health Care 医学-卫生保健
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信