Inclusion of patient-level emergency department characteristics to classify potentially redirectable visits to subacute care: a modified Delphi consensus study.

CMAJ open Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.9778/cmajo.20220062
Ryan P Strum, Walter Tavares, Andrew Worster, Lauren E Griffith, Andrew P Costa
{"title":"Inclusion of patient-level emergency department characteristics to classify potentially redirectable visits to subacute care: a modified Delphi consensus study.","authors":"Ryan P Strum,&nbsp;Walter Tavares,&nbsp;Andrew Worster,&nbsp;Lauren E Griffith,&nbsp;Andrew P Costa","doi":"10.9778/cmajo.20220062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most patients transported by Ontario paramedics to the emergency department have non-emergent conditions and may be more appropriately served by subacute community-based care centres. We sought to determine consensus on a set of patient characteristics that could be useful to classify retrospective emergency department visits that had a high probability of being primary care-like and potentially redirectable to a subacute care centre by paramedics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a modified Delphi study to assess expert consensus on characteristics of patients transported by paramedics to the emergency department from August to October 2021. An expert Delphi committee was constructed of emergency and family physicians in Ontario using purposive sampling. Experts rated whether each characteristic was useful to be included in a classification to identify potentially redirectable visits retrospectively, as well as characteristic details (e.g., upper and lower bounds). Consensus was considered 75% agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen experts participated in the study; the experts were mostly male (75%) and evenly divided between emergency and family medicine. After 2 rounds, consensus was achieved on 8 of 9 characteristics (89%). Four characteristics were determined as useful to classify potentially redirectable emergency department visits: age (81%), triage acuity (100%), specialist consult in the emergency department (94%) and emergency department visit outcome (81%). Specifications of each characteristic were refined as follows: young and middle-aged adults with a non-emergent triage acuity, did not receive a specialist physician consult in the emergency department and discharged from the emergency department.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Strong consensus was achieved to specify a classification system for potentially redirectable emergency department visits. These results will be combined with knowledge of which subacute care centres could conduct the main physician interventions to retrospectively identify emergency department visits that could have been suitable for paramedic redirection for further research.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>ID ISRCTN22901977.</p>","PeriodicalId":10432,"journal":{"name":"CMAJ open","volume":"11 1","pages":"E70-E76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/34/b5/cmajo.20220062.PMC9876581.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CMAJ open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20220062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Most patients transported by Ontario paramedics to the emergency department have non-emergent conditions and may be more appropriately served by subacute community-based care centres. We sought to determine consensus on a set of patient characteristics that could be useful to classify retrospective emergency department visits that had a high probability of being primary care-like and potentially redirectable to a subacute care centre by paramedics.

Methods: We conducted a modified Delphi study to assess expert consensus on characteristics of patients transported by paramedics to the emergency department from August to October 2021. An expert Delphi committee was constructed of emergency and family physicians in Ontario using purposive sampling. Experts rated whether each characteristic was useful to be included in a classification to identify potentially redirectable visits retrospectively, as well as characteristic details (e.g., upper and lower bounds). Consensus was considered 75% agreement.

Results: Sixteen experts participated in the study; the experts were mostly male (75%) and evenly divided between emergency and family medicine. After 2 rounds, consensus was achieved on 8 of 9 characteristics (89%). Four characteristics were determined as useful to classify potentially redirectable emergency department visits: age (81%), triage acuity (100%), specialist consult in the emergency department (94%) and emergency department visit outcome (81%). Specifications of each characteristic were refined as follows: young and middle-aged adults with a non-emergent triage acuity, did not receive a specialist physician consult in the emergency department and discharged from the emergency department.

Interpretation: Strong consensus was achieved to specify a classification system for potentially redirectable emergency department visits. These results will be combined with knowledge of which subacute care centres could conduct the main physician interventions to retrospectively identify emergency department visits that could have been suitable for paramedic redirection for further research.

Study registration: ID ISRCTN22901977.

纳入患者水平的急诊科特征,对可能重定向的亚急性护理就诊进行分类:一项修改的德尔菲共识研究。
背景:安大略省护理人员运送到急诊科的大多数患者都有非紧急情况,亚急性社区护理中心可能更适合。我们试图确定一组患者特征的共识,这些特征可能有助于对回顾性急诊科就诊进行分类,这些急诊科就诊很可能是类似初级保健的,并且有可能由护理人员重定向到亚急性护理中心。方法:我们进行了一项改进的德尔菲研究,以评估专家对2021年8月至10月期间由护理人员运送到急诊科的患者特征的共识。采用有目的抽样的方法,由安大略省的急诊和家庭医生组成专家德尔菲委员会。专家们对每个特征是否有用进行评估,以便将其纳入分类,以回顾性地确定潜在的可重定向访问,以及特征细节(例如,上限和下限)。75%的共识被认为是一致的。结果:16位专家参与研究;这些专家大多是男性(75%),在急诊医学和家庭医学方面各占一半。两轮后,对9个特征中的8个(89%)达成共识。四个特征被确定为对可能重定向的急诊科就诊分类有用:年龄(81%)、分诊灵敏度(100%)、急诊科专家咨询(94%)和急诊科就诊结果(81%)。每个特征的规格被细化如下:青年和中年人与非紧急分类的敏锐度,没有接受专科医生会诊在急诊科和出院急诊科。解释:我们达成了强烈的共识,为潜在的可重定向急诊科访问指定一个分类系统。这些结果将与哪些亚急性护理中心可以进行主要医生干预的知识相结合,以回顾性地确定可能适合护理人员重新定向的急诊科就诊,以进行进一步研究。研究注册:ID ISRCTN22901977。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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