Transportation Preferences of Patients Discharged from the Emergency Department in the Era of Ridesharing Apps.
ABSTRACT: Introduction:Patients discharged from the emergency department (ED) may encounter difficulty finding transportation home, increasing length of stay and ED crowding. We sought to determine the preferences of patients discharged from the ED with regard to their transportation home, and their awareness and past use of ridesharing services such as Lyft and Uber. Methods:We performed a prospective, survey-based study during a five-month period at a university-associated ED and Level I trauma center serving an urban area. Subjects were adult patients who were about to be discharged from the ED. We excluded patients requiring ambulance transport home. Results:Of 500 surveys distributed, 480 (96%) were completed. Average age was 47 ± 19 years, and 61% were female. There were 33,871 ED visits during the study period, and 67% were discharged home. The highest number of subjects arrived by ambulance (27%) followed by being dropped off (25%). Of the 408 (85%) subjects aware of ridesharing services, only eight (2%) came to the ED by this manner; however, 22 (5%) planned to use these services post-discharge. The survey also indicated that 377 (79%) owned smartphones, and 220 (46%) used ridesharing services. The most common plan to get home was with family/friend (35%), which was also the most preferred (29%). Regarding awareness and past use of ridesharing services, we were unable to detect any gender and/or racial differences from univariate analysis. However, we did detect age, education and income differences regarding awareness, but only age and education differences for past use. Logistic regression showed awareness and past use decreased with increasing patient age, but correlated positively with increasing education and income. Half the subjects felt their medical insurance should pay for their transportation, whereas roughly one-third felt ED staff should pay for it. Conclusion:Patients most commonly prefer to be driven home by a family member or friend after discharge from the ED. There is awareness of ridesharing services, but only 5% of patients planned to use these services post-discharge from the ED. Patients who are older, have limited income, and are less educated are less likely to be aware of or have previously used ridesharing services. ED staff may assist these patients by hailing ridesharing services for them at time of discharge.
Project description:Background Syncope is a common presentation to the emergency department (ED), yet little is known regarding patient mode of arrival. Methods We identified patients ?20 years old who presented to the ED with a primary diagnosis of syncope in Alberta and Ontario, Canada, between 2010 and 2016. Outcomes included 30-day in-hospital mortality, ED revisits, and rehospitalizations according to mode of arrival and discharge status. The estimated cost for ambulance use was calculated based on the provincial rates (Alberta CAD$385 and Ontario $240). Results A total of 271,601 syncope presentations to the ED were identified and 60.7% arrived by ambulance. A total of 76.3% (n = 125,793) of ambulance users and 87.0% of self-presenters (n = 92,845) were discharged from the ED. Regardless of mode of arrival, discharged patients were younger with fewer comorbidities. Compared with ambulance users admitted, those discharged had lower in-hospital mortality (0.2% vs 3.5%, P < 0.001), ED revisits (4.4% vs 10.4%, P < 0.001), and rehospitalizations (3.6% vs 10.7%, P < 0.001). Discharged self-presenters also had significantly lower outcomes (P < 0.001, for each outcome) compared with admitted self-presenters. The estimated cost for ambulance use among patients discharged from the ED was $33,137,735. Conclusion A majority of syncope patients arrived to the ED by ambulance, and over 3 quarters were directly discharged home. Although discharged patients had a favourable short-term prognosis, they incurred high transportation costs. Strategies aimed at preventing unnecessary ambulance use are needed.
Project description:Background:A significant number of patients who present to the emergency department (ED) following a fall or with other injuries require evaluation by a physical therapist. Traditionally, once emergent conditions are excluded in the ED, these patients are admitted to the hospital for evaluation by a physical therapist to determine whether they should be transferred to a sub-acute rehabilitation facility, discharged, require services at home, or require further inpatient care. Case management is typically used in conjunction with a physical therapist to determine eligibility for recommended services and to aid in placement. Objective:To evaluate the benefit of using ED-based physical therapist and case management services in lieu of routine hospital admission. Methods:Retrospective, observational study of consecutive patients presenting to an urban, tertiary care academic medical center ED between December 1, 2017, and November 30, 2018, who had a physical therapist consult placed in the ED. We additionally evaluated which of these patients were placed into ED observation for physical therapist consultation, how many required case management, and ED disposition: discharged home from the ED or ED observation with or without services, placed in a rehabilitation facility, or admitted to the hospital. Results:During the 12-month study period, 1296 patients (2.4% of the total seen in the ED) were assessed by a physical therapist. The mean age was 75.5 ± 15.2 and 832 (64.2%) were female. Case management was involved in 91.8% of these cases. The final patient disposition was as follows: admission 24.3% (95% CI = 22.1-26.7%), home discharge with or without services 47.8% (95% CI = 45.1-50.5%), rehabilitation (rehab) setting 27.9% (95% CI = 25.6%-30.4). The median (interquartile range) time in observation was 13.1 (6.0-20.3), 9.9 (1.8-15.8), and 18.4 (14.1-24.8) hours for patients admitted, discharged home, or sent to rehabilitation (P < 0.001). Among the 979 patients discharged home or sent to rehabilitation, 17 (1.7%) returned to the ED within 72 hours and were ultimately admitted. Conclusion:Given that the standard of care would otherwise be an admission to the hospital for 1 day or more for all patients requiring physical therapist consultation, an ED-based physical therapy and case management system serves as a viable method to substantially decrease hospital admissions and potentially reduce resource use, length of hospital stay, and cost both to patients and the health care system.
Project description:BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE:Heart failure (HF) readmission rates have plateaued despite scrutiny of hospital discharge practices. Many HF patients are discharged to skilled nursing facility (SNF) after hospitalization before returning home. Home healthcare (HHC) services received during the additional transition from SNF to home may affect readmission risk. Here, we examined whether receipt of HHC affects readmission risk during the transition from SNF to home following HF hospitalization. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Fee-for-service Medicare data, 2012 to 2015. PARTICIPANTS:Beneficiaries, aged 65?years and older, hospitalized with HF who were subsequently discharged to SNF and then discharged home. MEASUREMENTS:The primary outcome was unplanned readmission within 30?days of discharge to home from SNF. We compared time to readmission between those with and without HHC services using a Cox model. RESULTS:Of 67 585 HF hospitalizations discharged to SNFs and subsequently discharged home, 13 257 (19.6%) were discharged with HHC, and 54 328 (80.4%) were discharged without HHC. Patients discharged home from SNFs with HHC had lower 30-day readmission rates than patients discharged without HHC (22.8% vs 24.5%; P?<?.0001) and a longer time to readmission. In an adjusted model, the hazard for readmission was 0.91 (0.86-0.95) with receipt of HHC. CONCLUSIONS:Recipients of HHC were less likely to be readmitted within 30?days vs those discharged home without HHC. This is unexpected, as patients discharged with HHC likely have more functional impairments. Since patients requiring a SNF stay after hospital discharge may have additional needs, they may particularly benefit from restorative therapy through HHC; however, only approximately 20% received such services. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:96-102, 2019.
Project description:GUIDED-HF (Get With the Guidelines in Emergency Department Patients With Heart Failure) is a multicenter randomized trial of a patient-centered transitional care intervention in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) who are discharged either directly from the emergency department (ED) or after a brief period of ED-based observation. To optimize care and reduce ED and hospital revisits, there has been significant emphasis on improving transitions at the time of hospital discharge for patients with HF. Such efforts have been almost exclusively directed at hospitalized patients; individuals with AHF who are discharged from the ED or ED-based observation are not included in these transitional care initiatives. Patients with AHF discharged directly from the ED or after a brief period of ED-based observation are randomly assigned to our transition GUIDED-HF strategy or standard ED discharge. Patients in the GUIDED arm receive a tailored discharge plan via the study team, based on their identified barriers to outpatient management and associated guideline-based interventions. This plan includes conducting a home visit soon after ED discharge combined with close outpatient follow-up and subsequent coaching calls to improve postdischarge care and avoid subsequent ED revisits and inpatient admissions. Up to 700 patients at 11 sites will be enrolled over 3 years of the study. GUIDED-HF will test a novel approach to AHF management strategy that includes tailored transitional care for patients discharged from the ED or ED-based observation. If successful, this program may significantly alter the current paradigm of AHF patient care.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02519283.
Project description:We sought to determine if discharge home with home health care (HHC) is an independent predictor of increased readmission after pancreatectomy.We examined 30-day readmissions in patients undergoing pancreatectomy using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database for California from 2009 to 2011. Readmissions were categorized as severe or nonsevere using the Modified Accordion Severity Grading System. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association of discharge home with HHC and 30-day readmission using discharge home without HHC as the reference group. Propensity score matching was used as an additional analysis to compare the rate of 30-day readmission between patients discharged home with HHC with patients discharged home without HHC.Of 3,573 patients who underwent pancreatectomy, 752 (21.0%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. In a multivariable logistic regression model, discharge home with HHC was an independent predictor of increased 30-day readmission (odds ratio = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.69; p = 0.004). Using propensity score matching, patients who received HHC had a significantly increased rate of 30-day readmission compared with patients discharged home without HHC (24.3% vs 19.8%; p < 0.001). Patients discharged home with HHC had a significantly increased rate of nonsevere readmission compared with those discharged home without HHC, by univariate comparison (19.2% vs 13.9%; p < 0.001), but not severe readmission (6.4% vs 4.7%; p = 0.08). In multivariable logistic regression models, excluding patients discharged to facilities, discharge home with HHC was an independent predictor of increased nonsevere readmissions (odds ratio = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.79; p = 0.005), but not severe readmissions (odds ratio = 1.31; 95% CI, 0.88-1.93; p = 0.18).Discharge home with HHC after pancreatectomy is an independent predictor of increased 30-day readmission; specifically, these services are associated with increased nonsevere readmissions, but not severe readmissions.
Project description:The aim was to study the cause-specific mortality of users of the emergency department (ED) who received a diagnosis of alcohol use disorder (AUD) in comparison with mortality of other users of the department.A population-based prospective cohort study.All patients aged 18 years and above who were subsequently discharged home from the ED during the years 2002-2008. A total of 107,237 patients were followed by record linkage to a nationwide cause-of-death registry: 1210 patients with AUD as the main discharge diagnosis and 106,027 patients in the comparison group. HR and 95% CIs were calculated.ED at Landspitali-the National University Hospital of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland. The hospital offers tertiary care and is the number one trauma centre and community hospital for the greater Reykjavik area. According to the population registry, 78% of the inhabitants of the area attended the ED during the study period.72 patients died in the AUD group and 4807 in the comparison group. The adjusted HR for all causes of death was 1.91 (95% CI 1.51 to 2.42). The HR for AUDs was 47.68 (95% CI 11.56 to 196.59) while for alcohol liver disease the HR was 19.06 (95% CI 6.07 to 59.87). The HR was also elevated for diseases of the circulatory system: HR 2.52 (95% CI 1.73 to 3.68); accidental poisoning: HR=13.64, (95% CI 3.98 to 46.73); suicide: HR=2.72 (95% CI 1.08 to 6.83); and event of undetermined intent: HR=10.89 (95% CI 4.53 to 26.16).AUD as the discharge diagnosis at the ED, among patients who were not admitted to a hospital ward but discharged home, predicts increased mortality. As the results conclusively show the vulnerability of these patients, one can question whether their needs are adequately met at the ED.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study aims to describe the association between use of municipality healthcare services before an emergency department (ED) contact and mortality, hospital reattendance and institutionalisation. DESIGN:Population-based prospective cohort study. SETTING:ED of a large university hospital. PARTICIPANTS:All medical patients ≥65 years of age from a single municipality with a first attendance to the ED during a 1-year period (November 2013 to November 2014). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Patients were categorised as independent of home care, dependent of home care or in residential care depending on municipality healthcare before ED contact. Patients were followed 360 days after discharge. Outcomes were postdischarge mortality, hospital reattendance and institutionalisation. RESULTS:A total of 3775 patients were included (55% women), aged (median (IQR) 78 years (71-85)). At baseline, 48.9% were independent, 34.9% received home care and 16.2% were in residential care. Receiving home care or being in residential care was a strong predictor of mortality, hospital reattendance and institutionalisation. Among patients who were independent, 64.3% continued being independent up to 360 days after discharge. Even among patients ≥85 years, 35.4% lived independently in their own house 1 year after ED contact. CONCLUSION:Prehospital information on municipality healthcare is closely related to patient outcome in older ED patients. It might have the potential to be used in risk stratification and planning of needs of older acute medical patients attending the ED.
Project description:Introduction:Many emergency department (ED) patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) who meet low-risk criteria may be eligible for a short length of stay (LOS) (<24 hours), with expedited discharge home either directly from the ED or after a brief observation or hospitalization. We describe the association between expedited discharge and site of discharge on care satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) among patients with low-risk PE (PE Severity Index [PESI] Classes I-III). Methods:This phone survey was conducted from September 2014 through April 2015 as part of a retrospective cohort study across 21 community EDs in Northern California. We surveyed low-risk patients with acute PE, treated predominantly with enoxaparin bridging and warfarin. All eligible patients were called 2-8 weeks after their index ED visit. PE-specific, patient-satisfaction questions addressed overall care, discharge instruction clarity, and LOS. We scored physical and mental QOL using a modified version of the validated Short Form Health Survey. Satisfaction and QOL were compared by LOS. For those with expedited discharge, we compared responses by site of discharge: ED vs. hospital, which included ED-based observation units. We used chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests as indicated. Results:Survey response rate was 82.3% (424 of 515 eligible patients). Median age of respondents was 64 years; 47.4% were male. Of the 145 patients (34.2%) with a LOS<24 hours, 65 (44.8%) were discharged home from the ED. Of all patients, 89.6% were satisfied with their overall care and 94.1% found instructions clear. Sixty-six percent were satisfied with their LOS, whereas 17.5% would have preferred a shorter LOS and 16.5% a longer LOS. There were no significant differences in satisfaction between patients with LOS<24 hours vs. ?24 hours (p>0.13 for all). Physical QOL scores were significantly higher for expedited-discharge patients (p=0.01). Patients with expedited discharge home from the ED vs. the hospital had no significant difference in satisfaction (p>0.20 for all) or QOL (p>0.19 for all). Conclusion:ED patients with low-risk PE reported high satisfaction with their care in follow-up surveys. Expedited discharge (<24 hours) and site of discharge were not associated with differences in patient satisfaction.
Project description:Hospital admission rates for patients with heart failure (HF) presenting for emergency department (ED) care vary, and the implications of direct discharge home from the ED are unknown. We examined whether patients treated in hospitals with low admission rates exhibit higher rates of repeat ED visits, hospital readmissions and death.We divided EDs into low-, medium- and high-admission-rate tertiles by their standardised HF admission rate in Ontario, Canada. Among adults (?18?years) with HF discharged from an ED between April 2004 and March 2010, we evaluated the primary outcomes of repeat ED visits or hospitalisations for HF, and secondary outcomes, which included death, within 30?days stratified by HF admission-rate tertile.89?878 patients with HF presented to low- (n=29?929), medium- (n=30?900) or high- (n=29?049) admission-rate institutions, with hospitalisation rates of <67%, 67-75% and >75%, respectively. Among 28?175 ED-discharged patients, the multivariable-adjusted HR for repeat ED visit or hospitalisation for HF at low-admission-rate institutions was 1.18 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.29, p<0.001) compared with high-admission institutions. Similarly, the HR for repeat ED visits for HF was 1.28 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.44, p<0.001) at low-admission hospitals. Compared with discharged patients in the high-admission-rate tertile, adjusted HR for 30-day mortality was 1.19 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.47) at low-admission-rate hospitals. The HRs for all of the above outcomes were not significantly increased at medium-admission-rate hospitals.Patients seeking care at institutions with lower rates of HF admission showed higher rates of repeat ED visits or hospitalisations after previous ED discharge.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the statistical association between routine home health use after prostatectomy, short-term surgical outcomes, and payments. METHODS:We identified all men who underwent a robotic radical prostatectomy from April 1, 2014, to October 31, 2015, in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) with insurance from Medicare or a large commercial payer. We calculated rates of "routine" home care use after prostatectomy by urology practice. We defined "routine" home care as home care initiated within 4 days of discharge among patients discharged without a pelvic drain. We then compared emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, prolonged catheter use, catheter reinsertion rates, and 90-day episode payments, in unadjusted and using a propensity-adjusted analysis, for those who did and did not receive home care. RESULTS:We identified 647 patients, of whom 13% received routine home health care. At the practice level, the use of routine home care after prostatectomy varied from 0% to 53% (P?=?.05) (mean: 3.6%, median: 0%). Unadjusted, patients with routine home care had increased ED visits within 16 days (15.5% vs 6.9%, P?<.01), similar rates of catheter duration for >16 days (3.6% vs 3.0%, P?=?.79) and need for catheter replacement (1.2% vs 2.5%, P?=?.46), and a trend toward decreased readmissions (0% vs 4.1%, P?=?.06). Only the increased ED visits remained significant in adjusted analyses (P?<.01). Home health had an average payment of $1000 per episode. CONCLUSION:Thirteen percent of patients received routine home health care after prostatectomy, without improved outcomes. These findings suggest that patients do not routinely require home health care to improve short-term outcomes following radical prostatectomy, however, the appropriate use of home health care should be evaluated further.