Stephen Park, Sean M. Kim, Hye Kwang Kim, Emiliano Tabarsi, Brian Hom, Shea P. Gallagher, Chaiss Ugarte, Damon Clark, M. Schellenberg, Matthew Martin, Kenji Inaba, K. Matsushima
{"title":"重返街头:研究急诊科中外伤后出院的无家可归病人的返回率。","authors":"Stephen Park, Sean M. Kim, Hye Kwang Kim, Emiliano Tabarsi, Brian Hom, Shea P. Gallagher, Chaiss Ugarte, Damon Clark, M. Schellenberg, Matthew Martin, Kenji Inaba, K. Matsushima","doi":"10.1177/00031348241248691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nThe unhoused population is at high risk for traumatic injuries and faces unique challenges in accessing follow-up care. However, there is scarce data regarding differences in Emergency Department (ED) return rates and reasons for return between unhoused and housed patients.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe conducted a 3-year retrospective cohort study at a level-1 trauma center in a large metropolitan area. All patients who presented to the ED with traumatic injuries and were discharged without hospital admission were included in the study. The primary outcome was ED returns for trauma-related complications or new traumatic events <6 months after discharge. Patient characteristics and study outcomes were compared between housed and unhoused groups.\n\n\nRESULTS\nA total of 4184 patients were identified, of which 20.3% were unhoused. Compared to housed, unhoused patients were more likely to return to the ED (18.8% vs 13.9%, P < .001), more likely to return for trauma-related complications (4.6% vs 3.1%, P = .045), more likely to return with new trauma (7.1% vs 2.8%, P < .001), and less likely to return for scheduled wound checks (2.5% vs 4.3%, P = .012). Of the patients who returned with trauma-related complications, unhoused patients had a higher proportion of wound infection (20.5% vs 5.7%, P = .008). In the regression analysis, unhoused status was associated with increased odds of ED return with new trauma and decreased odds of return for scheduled wound checks.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThis study observed significant disparities between unhoused and housed patients after trauma. Our results suggest that inadequate follow-up in unhoused patients may contribute to further ED return.","PeriodicalId":325363,"journal":{"name":"The American Surgeon","volume":"17 4","pages":"31348241248691"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Back on the Streets: Examining Emergency Department Return Rates for Unhoused Patients Discharged After Trauma.\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Park, Sean M. Kim, Hye Kwang Kim, Emiliano Tabarsi, Brian Hom, Shea P. Gallagher, Chaiss Ugarte, Damon Clark, M. Schellenberg, Matthew Martin, Kenji Inaba, K. Matsushima\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00031348241248691\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nThe unhoused population is at high risk for traumatic injuries and faces unique challenges in accessing follow-up care. However, there is scarce data regarding differences in Emergency Department (ED) return rates and reasons for return between unhoused and housed patients.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nWe conducted a 3-year retrospective cohort study at a level-1 trauma center in a large metropolitan area. All patients who presented to the ED with traumatic injuries and were discharged without hospital admission were included in the study. The primary outcome was ED returns for trauma-related complications or new traumatic events <6 months after discharge. Patient characteristics and study outcomes were compared between housed and unhoused groups.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nA total of 4184 patients were identified, of which 20.3% were unhoused. Compared to housed, unhoused patients were more likely to return to the ED (18.8% vs 13.9%, P < .001), more likely to return for trauma-related complications (4.6% vs 3.1%, P = .045), more likely to return with new trauma (7.1% vs 2.8%, P < .001), and less likely to return for scheduled wound checks (2.5% vs 4.3%, P = .012). Of the patients who returned with trauma-related complications, unhoused patients had a higher proportion of wound infection (20.5% vs 5.7%, P = .008). In the regression analysis, unhoused status was associated with increased odds of ED return with new trauma and decreased odds of return for scheduled wound checks.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nThis study observed significant disparities between unhoused and housed patients after trauma. Our results suggest that inadequate follow-up in unhoused patients may contribute to further ED return.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325363,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Surgeon\",\"volume\":\"17 4\",\"pages\":\"31348241248691\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241248691\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241248691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景无住房人群是创伤性损伤的高危人群,在获得后续治疗方面面临着独特的挑战。然而,关于无住所患者和有住所患者在急诊科(ED)复诊率和复诊原因方面的差异的数据却很少。所有在急诊室就诊的外伤患者均被纳入研究。研究的主要结果是患者在出院后 6 个月内因创伤相关并发症或新的创伤事件而重返急诊室。结果共确定了 4184 名患者,其中 20.3% 的患者无住房。与有住所的患者相比,无住所的患者更有可能返回急诊室(18.8% vs 13.9%,P < .001),更有可能因创伤相关并发症返回急诊室(4.6% vs 3.1%,P = .045),更有可能因新的创伤返回急诊室(7.1% vs 2.8%,P < .001),更不可能返回急诊室进行定期伤口检查(2.5% vs 4.3%,P = .012)。在因创伤相关并发症而复诊的患者中,无住房患者的伤口感染比例更高(20.5% 对 5.7%,P = .008)。在回归分析中,无住房患者因新创伤返回急诊室的几率增加,而返回急诊室接受预定伤口检查的几率降低。我们的研究结果表明,对无住房患者的随访不足可能会导致再次返回急诊室。
Back on the Streets: Examining Emergency Department Return Rates for Unhoused Patients Discharged After Trauma.
BACKGROUND
The unhoused population is at high risk for traumatic injuries and faces unique challenges in accessing follow-up care. However, there is scarce data regarding differences in Emergency Department (ED) return rates and reasons for return between unhoused and housed patients.
METHODS
We conducted a 3-year retrospective cohort study at a level-1 trauma center in a large metropolitan area. All patients who presented to the ED with traumatic injuries and were discharged without hospital admission were included in the study. The primary outcome was ED returns for trauma-related complications or new traumatic events <6 months after discharge. Patient characteristics and study outcomes were compared between housed and unhoused groups.
RESULTS
A total of 4184 patients were identified, of which 20.3% were unhoused. Compared to housed, unhoused patients were more likely to return to the ED (18.8% vs 13.9%, P < .001), more likely to return for trauma-related complications (4.6% vs 3.1%, P = .045), more likely to return with new trauma (7.1% vs 2.8%, P < .001), and less likely to return for scheduled wound checks (2.5% vs 4.3%, P = .012). Of the patients who returned with trauma-related complications, unhoused patients had a higher proportion of wound infection (20.5% vs 5.7%, P = .008). In the regression analysis, unhoused status was associated with increased odds of ED return with new trauma and decreased odds of return for scheduled wound checks.
CONCLUSIONS
This study observed significant disparities between unhoused and housed patients after trauma. Our results suggest that inadequate follow-up in unhoused patients may contribute to further ED return.