Show simple item record

Recurrent and High‐frequency Use of the Emergency Department by Pediatric Patients

dc.contributor.authorAlpern, Elizabeth R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorClark, Amy E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAlessandrini, Evaline A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGorelick, Marc H.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKittick, Marlenaen_US
dc.contributor.authorStanley, Rachel M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMichael Dean, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTeach, Stephen J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChamberlain, James M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorStevenson, Michelle D.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-23T15:59:10Z
dc.date.available2015-06-01T15:48:45Zen_US
dc.date.issued2014-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationAlpern, Elizabeth R.; Clark, Amy E.; Alessandrini, Evaline A.; Gorelick, Marc H.; Kittick, Marlena; Stanley, Rachel M.; Michael Dean, J.; Teach, Stephen J.; Chamberlain, James M.; Stevenson, Michelle D. (2014). "Recurrent and High‐frequency Use of the Emergency Department by Pediatric Patients." Academic Emergency Medicine (4): 365-373.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1069-6563en_US
dc.identifier.issn1553-2712en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/106853
dc.description.abstractObjectives The authors sought to describe the epidemiology of and risk factors for recurrent and high‐frequency use of the emergency department (ED) by children. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study using a database of children aged 0 to 17 years, inclusive, presenting to 22 EDs of the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) during 2007, with 12‐month follow‐up after each index visit. ED diagnoses for each visit were categorized as trauma, acute medical, or chronic medical conditions. Recurrent visits were defined as any repeat visit; high‐frequency use was defined as four or more recurrent visits. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to measure the strength of associations between patient and visit characteristics and recurrent ED use. Results A total of 695,188 unique children had at least one ED visit each in 2007, with 455,588 recurrent ED visits in the 12 months following the index visits. Sixty‐four percent of patients had no recurrent visits, 20% had one, 8% had two, 4% had three, and 4% had four or more recurrent visits. Acute medical diagnoses accounted for most visits regardless of the number of recurrent visits. As the number of recurrent visits per patient rose, chronic diseases were increasingly represented, with asthma being the most common ED diagnosis. Trauma‐related diagnoses were more common among patients without recurrent visits than among those with high‐frequency recurrent visits (28% vs. 9%; p < 0.001). High‐frequency recurrent visits were more often within the highest severity score classifications. In multivariable analysis, recurrent visits were associated with younger age, black or Hispanic race or ethnicity, and public health insurance. Conclusions Risk factors for recurrent ED use by children include age, race and ethnicity, and insurance status. Although asthma plays an important role in recurrent ED use, acute illnesses account for the majority of recurrent ED visits. Resumen Objetivos Describir la epidemiología y los factores de riesgo de revista e hiperfrecuentación del servicio de urgencias (SU) por parte de los pacientes pediátricos. Metodología Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo mediante una base de datos de niños entre 0 y 17 años inclusive, que acudieron a 22 SU de la Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network durante 2007, con un seguimiento de 12 meses tras cada visita índice. Los diagnósticos del SU de cada visita se clasificaron como traumatológico, médico agudo o enfermedades médicas crónicas. Las revisitas se definieron como cualquier visita repetida; la hiperfrecuentación se definió como cuatro o más revisitas. Se utilizaron ecuaciones de estimación generalizada para medir la fuerza de las asociaciones entre las características al paciente y la visita y la revisita del SU. Resultados Un total de 695.188 niños tuvieron al menos una visita al SU en 2007, con 455.588 revisitas al SU en los 12 meses tras las visitas índice. Un 64% de los pacientes no tuvieron revisitas, un 20% tuvo una, un 8% tuvo dos, un 4% tuvo tres y un 4% tuvo cuatro o más revisitas. Los diagnósticos médicos agudos representan la mayoría de las visitas, con independencia del número de revisitas. A medida que el número de revisitas por paciente aumentaba, las enfermedades crónicas estaban más representadas, y el asma fue el diagnóstico más común en el SU. Los diagnósticos relacionados con lo traumatológico fueron más frecuentes entre los pacientes sin revisitas que entre aquéllos con hiperfrecuentación (28% vs. 9%; p < 0,001). La alta frecuencia de revisitas fue más frecuente en las clasificaciones de gravedad más altas. En el análisis multivariable, las revisitas se asociaron con una edad más joven, raza o etnia negra o hispana, y la tenencia de un seguro de salud público. Conclusiones Los factores de riesgo para la revisita al SU por los niños incluyen la edad, la raza o etnia, y el tipo de seguro médico. Aunque el asma juega un papel importante en la revisita al SU, las enfermedades agudas representan la mayoría de la revistas al SU.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherNational Center for Health Statisticsen_US
dc.titleRecurrent and High‐frequency Use of the Emergency Department by Pediatric Patientsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106853/1/acem12347.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/acem.12347en_US
dc.identifier.sourceAcademic Emergency Medicineen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. NCHS Data Brief. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db99.htm. Accessed Dec 29, 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRiggs JE, Davis SM, Hobbs GR, Paulson DJ, Chinnis AS, Heilman PL. Association between early returns and frequent ED visits at a rural academic medical center. Am J Emerg Med 2003; 21: 30 – 1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCook LJ, Knight S, Junkins EP, Mann NC, Dean JM, Olson LM. Repeat patients to the emergency department in a statewide database. Acad Emerg Med 2004; 11: 256 – 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFuda KK, Immekus R. Frequent users of Massachusetts emergency departments: a statewide analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2006; 48: 9 – 16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaCalle E, Rabin E. Frequent users of emergency departments: the myths, the data, and the policy implications. Ann Emerg Med 2010; 56: 42 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYamamoto LG, Zimmerman KR, Butts RJ, et al. Characteristics of frequent pediatric emergency department users. Pediatr Emerg Care 1995; 11: 340 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeDuc K, Rosebrook H, Rannie M, Gao D. Pediatric emergency department recidivism: demographic characteristics and diagnostic predictors. J Emerg Nurs 2006; 32: 131 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePECARN. The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN): rationale, development, and first steps. Acad Emerg Med 2003; 10: 661 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCook LJ, Olson LM, Dean JM. Probabilistic record linkage: relationships between file sizes, identifiers and match weights. Methods Inf Med 2001; 40: 196 – 203.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLogue EP, Ali S, Spiers J, Newton AS, Lander JA. Characteristics of patients and families who make early return visits to the pediatric emergency department. Open Access EM 2013; 5: 9 – 15.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAli AB, Place R, Howel J, Malubay SM. Early pediatric emergency department return visits: a prospective patient‐centric assessment. Clin Pediatr 2012; 51: 651 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlpern ER, Stanley RM, Gorelick MH, et al. Epidemiology of a pediatric emergency medicine research network: The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network core data project. Pediatr Emerg Care 2006; 22: 689 – 99.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlessandrini EA, Alpern ER, Chamberlain JM, Shea JA, Gorelick MH. A new diagnosis grouping system for child emergency department visits. Acad Emerg Med 2010; 17: 204 – 13.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlessandrini EA, Alpern ER, Chamberlain JM, Shea J, Holubkov R, Gorelick MH. Developing a diagnosis‐based severity classification system for use in emergency medical systems for children. Acad Emerg Med 2012; 19: 70 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWalsh‐Kelly CM, Kelly K, Drendel AL, Grabowski L, Kuhn EM. Emergency department revisits for pediatric acute asthma exacerbations. Pediatr Emerg Care 2008; 24: 505 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDoren KM, Raven MC, Rosenheck RA. What drives frequent emergency department use in an integrated health system? National data from the Veterans Health Administration. Ann Emerg Med 2013; 62: 151 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLasser KE, Kronman AC, Cabral H, Samet JH. Emergency department use by primary care patients at a safety‐net hospital. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172: 278 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAkinbami LJ, Moorman JE, Garbe PL, Sondik EJ. Status of childhood asthma in the United States, 1980‐2007. Pediatrics 2009; 123 ( Suppl 3 ): S131 – 45.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGuenther E, Knight S, Olson LM, Dean JM, Keenan HT. Prediction of child abuse risk from emergency department use. J Pediatr 2009; 154: 272 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJacobstein CR, Alessandrini EA, Lavelle JM, Shaw KN. Unscheduled revisits to a pediatric emergency department: risk factors for children with fever or infection‐related complaints. Pediatr Emerg Care 2005; 21: 816 – 21.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNewton MF, Keirns CC, Cunningham R, Hayward RA, Stanley R. Uninsured adults presenting to US emergency departments: assumptions vs data. JAMA 2008; 300: 1914 – 24.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSandoval E, Smith S, Walter J, et al. A comparison of frequent and infrequent visitors to an urban emergency department. J Emerg Med 2010; 38: 115 – 21.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePines JM. How Frequent emergency department use by U.S. veterans can inform good public policy. Ann Emerg Med 2013; 62: 160 – 1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFieldston ES, Alpern ER, Nadel FM, Shea JA, Alessandrini EA. A qualitative assessment of reasons for nonurgent visits to the emergency department: parent and health professional opinions. Pediatr Emerg Care 2012; 28: 220 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePitts SR, Niska R, Xu J, Burt CW. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2006 Emergency Department Summary. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2008.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2005, Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2005, p 311.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2009: With Special Feature on Medical Technology. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2010, p 333.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePitts SR, Carrier ER, Rich EC, Kellermann AL. Where Americans get acute care: increasingly, it's not at their doctor's office. Health Aff 2010; 29: 1620 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCunningham P. Nonurgent Use of Hospital Emergency Departments. Testimony before the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging. Hearing on “Diverting Non‐urgent Emergency Room Use: Can It Provide Better Care and Lower Costs?” Center for Studying Health System Change, 2011. Available at: http://www.hschange.com/CONTENT/1204/?words=au07. Accessed Dec 29, 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMathison DJ, Chamberlain JM, Cowan NM, et al. Primary care spatial density and nonurgent emergency department utilization: a new methodology for evaluating access to care. Acad Pediatr 2013; 13: 278 – 85.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality. National Healthcare Disparities Report, 2011. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/nhqrdr/nhqr11/nhqr11.pdf. Accessed Dec 29, 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarroll AE, Frackt AB. New evidence supports, challenges, and informs the ambitions of health reform. JAMA 2013; 309: 2600 – 1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUnited States Congress. Affordable Care Act. Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf. Accessed Dec 28, 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Accountable Care Organizations: Improving Care Coordination for People With Medicare. Available at: http://www.medicare.gov/manage-your-health/coordinating-your-care/accountable-care-organizations.html. Accessed Dec 28, 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBerwick DM. Making good on ACO's promise–the final rule for the Medicare shared savings program. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 1753 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFisher ES, McClellan MB, Safran DG. Building the path to accountable care. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 2445 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRieselbach RE, Kellermann AL. A model health care delivery system for Medicaid. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2476 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLocker TE, Baston S, Mason SM, Nicholl J. Defining frequent use of an urban emergency department. Emerg Med J 2007; 24: 398 – 401.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHunt KA, Weber EJ, Showstack JA, Colby DC, Callaham ML. Characteristics of frequent users of emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med 2006; 48: 1 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDePiero AD, Ochsenschlager DW, Chamberlain JM. Analysis of pediatric hospitalizations after emergency department release as a quality improvement tool. Ann Emerg Med 2002; 39: 159 – 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePines JM, Asplin BR, Kaji AH, et al. Frequent users of emergency department services: gaps in knowledge and a proposed research agenda. Acad Emerg Med 2011; 18: e64 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlank FS, Li H, Henneman PL, et al. A descriptive study of heavy emergency department users at an academic emergency department reveals heavy ED users have better access to care than average users. J Emerg Nurs 2005; 31: 139 – 44.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.