Effect of Testing and Treatment on Emergency Department Length of Stay Using a National Database
dc.contributor.author | Kocher, Keith E. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Meurer, William J. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Desmond, Jeffrey S. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Nallamothu, Brahmajee K. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-07-12T17:26:00Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-07-01T14:33:06Z | en_US |
dc.date.issued | 2012-05 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Kocher, Keith E.; Meurer, William J.; Desmond, Jeffrey S.; Nallamothu, Brahmajee K. (2012). "Effect of Testing and Treatment on Emergency Department Length of Stay Using a National Database." Academic Emergency Medicine 19(5). <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/92123> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1069-6563 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1553-2712 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/92123 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: Testing and treatment are essential aspects of the delivery of emergency care. Recognition of the effects of these activities on emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) has implications for administrators planning efficient operations, providers, and patients regarding expectations for length of visit; researchers in creating better models to predict LOS; and policy‐makers concerned about ED crowding. Methods: A secondary analysis was performed using years 2006 through 2008 of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), a nationwide study of ED services. In univariate and bivariate analyses, the authors assessed ED LOS and frequency of testing (blood test, urinalysis, electrocardiogram [ECG], radiograph, ultrasound, computed tomography [CT], or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and treatment (providing a medication or performance of a procedure) according to disposition (discharged or admitted status). Two sets of multivariable models were developed to assess the contribution of testing and treatment to LOS, also stratified by disposition. The first was a series of logistic regression models to provide an overview of how testing and treatment activity affects three dichotomized LOS cutoffs at 2, 4, and 6 hours. The second was a generalized linear model (GLM) with a log‐link function and gamma distribution to fit skewed LOS data, which provided time costs associated with tests and treatment. Results: Among 360 million weighted ED visits included in this analysis, 227 million (63%) involved testing, 304 million (85%) involved treatment, and 201 million (56%) involved both. Overall, visits with any testing were associated with longer LOS (median = 196 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] = 125 to 305 minutes) than those with any treatment (median = 159 minutes; IQR = 91 to 262 minutes). This difference was more pronounced among discharged patients than admitted patients. Obtaining a test was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 2.29 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.86 to 2.83) for experiencing a more than 4‐hour LOS, while performing a treatment had no effect (adjusted OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.03). The most time‐costly testing modalities included blood test (adjusted marginal effects on LOS = +72 minutes; 95% CI = 66 to 78 minutes), MRI (+64 minutes; 95% CI = 36 to 93 minutes), CT (+59 minutes; 95% CI = 54 to 65 minutes), and ultrasound (US; +56 minutes; 95% CI = 45 to 67 minutes). Treatment time costs were less substantial: performing a procedure (+24 minutes; 95% CI = 20 to 28 minutes) and providing a medication (+15 minutes; 95% CI = 8 to 21 minutes). Conclusions: Testing and less substantially treatment were associated with prolonged LOS in the ED, particularly for blood testing and advanced imaging. This knowledge may better direct efforts at streamlining delivery of care for the most time‐costly diagnostic modalities or suggest areas for future research into improving processes of care. Developing systems to improve efficient utilization of these services in the ED may improve patient and provider satisfaction. Such practice improvements could then be examined to determine their effects on ED crowding. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd | en_US |
dc.publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. | en_US |
dc.title | Effect of Testing and Treatment on Emergency Department Length of Stay Using a National Database | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Medicine (General) | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | From The Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy (KEK, BKN); the Department of Emergency Medicine (KEK, WJM, JSD), the Department of Neurology (WJM), and the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (BKN), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; and The VA Ann Arbor Health Services Research & Development Center of Excellence (BKN), Ann Arbor, MI. | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 22594356 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/92123/1/j.1553-2712.2012.01353.x.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01353.x | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Academic Emergency Medicine | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Jacobs JE, Birnbaum BA, Macari M, et al. Acute appendicitis: comparison of helical CT diagnosis focused technique with oral contrast material versus nonfocused technique with oral and intravenous contrast material. Radiology. 2001; 220: 683 – 90. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Qualls M, Pallin DJ, Schuur JD. Parametric versus nonparametric statistical tests: the length of stay example. Acad Emerg Med. 2010; 17: 1113 – 21. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wilper AP, Woolhandler S, Lasser KE, et al. Waits to see an emergency department physician: U.S. trends and predictors, 1997–2004. Health Aff. 2008; 27: w84 – 95. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Horwitz LI, Green J, Bradley EH. US emergency department performance on wait time and length of visit. Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 55: 133 – 41. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Tutorial in biostatistics, multivariable prognositc models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996; 15: 361 – 87. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gunn ML, Kohr JR. State of the art: technologies for computed tomography dose reduction. Emerg Radiol. 2010; 17: 209 – 18. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Korley FK, Pham JC, Kirsch TD. Use of advanced radiology during visits to US emergency departments for injury‐related conditions, 1998–2007. JAMA. 2010; 304: 1465 – 71. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lee J, Kirschner J, Pawa S, Wiener DE, Newman DH, Shah K. Computed tomography use in the adult emergency department of an academic urban hospital from 2001 to 2007. Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 56: 591 – 6. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kocher KE, Meurer WJ, Fazel R, Scott PA, Krumholz HM, Nallamothu BK. National trends in use of computed tomography in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2011; 58: 452 – 62. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Schuur JD, Chu G, Sucov A. Effect of oral contrast for abdominal computed tomography on emergency department length of stay. Emerg Radiol. 2010; 17: 267 – 73. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Anderson BA, Salem L, Flum DR. A systematic review of whether oral contrast is necessary for the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis in adults. Am J Surg. 2005; 190: 474 – 8. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Anderson SW, Soto JA, Lucey BC, et al. Abdominal 64‐MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only. AJR. 2009; 193: 1282 – 8. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Paulson EK, Coursey CA. CT protocols for acute appendicitis: time for change. AJR. 2009; 193: 1268 – 71. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Hlibczuk V, Dattaro JA, Jin Z, Falzon L, Brown MD. Diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast computed tomography for appendicitis in adults: a systematic review. Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 55: 51 – 9. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Singer AJ, Ardise J, Gulla J, Cangro J. Point‐of‐care testing reduces length of stay in emergency department chest pain patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2005; 45: 587 – 91. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Asplin BR, Magid DJ, Rhodes KV, Solberg LI, Lurie N, Camargo CA Jr. A conceptual model of emergency department crowding. Ann Emerg Med 2003; 42: 173 – 80. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rathlev NK, Chessare J, Olshaker J, et al. Time series analysis of variables associated with daily mean emergency department length of stay. Ann Emerg Med. 2007; 49: 265 – 71. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Asaro PV, Lewis LM, Boxerman SB. The impact of input and output factors on emergency department throughput. Acad Emerg Med. 2007; 14: 235 – 42. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McCarthy ML, Zeger SL, Ding R, et al. Crowding delays treatment and lengthens emergency department length of stay, even among high‐acuity patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2009; 54: 492 – 503. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bursch B, Beezy J, Shaw R. Emergency department satisfaction: what matters most? Ann Emerg Med. 1993; 22: 586 – 91. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thompson DA, Yarnold PR, Williams DR, Adams SL. Effects of actual waiting time, perceived waiting time, information delivery, and expressive quality on patient satisfaction in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1996; 28: 657 – 65. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Spaite DW, Bartholomeaux F, Guisto J, et al. Rapid process redesign in a university‐based emergency department: decreasing waiting time intervals and improving patient satisfaction. Ann Emerg Med. 2002; 39: 168 – 77. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wiler JL, Gentle C, Halfpenny JM, et al. Optimizing emergency department front‐end operations. Ann Emerg Med. 2010; 55: 142 – 60. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Coats TJ, Michalis S. Mathematical modelling of patient flow through an accident and emergency department. Emerg Med J. 2001; 18: 190 – 2. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Günal MM, Pidd M. Understanding target‐driven action in emergency department performance using simulation. Emerg Med J. 2009; 26: 724 – 7. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Dickson EW, Anguelov Z, Vetterick D, Eller A, Singh S. Use of lean in the emergency department: a case series of 4 hospitals. Ann Emerg Med. 2009; 54: 504 – 10. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gardner RL, Sarkar U, Maselli JH, Gonzales R. Factors associated with longer ED lengths of stay. Am J Emerg Med. 2007; 25: 643 – 50. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bekmezian A, Chung PJ, Cabana MD, Maselli JH, Hilton JF, Hersh AL. Factors associated with prolonged emergency department length of stay for admitted children. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011; 27: 110 – 5. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Yoon P, Steiner I, Reinhardt G. Analysis of factors influencing length of stay in the emergency department. Can J Emerg Med. 2003; 5: 155 – 61. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Herring A, Wilper A, Himmelstein DU, et al. Increasing length of stay among adult visits to U.S. emergency departments, 2001–2005. Acad Emerg Med. 2009; 16: 609 – 16. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Slade EP, Dixon LB, Semmel S. Trends in the duration of emergency department visits, 2001–2006. Psychiatr Serv. 2010; 61: 878 – 84. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Ambulatory Health Care Data. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ahcd.htm. Accessed Feb 21, 2012. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2008 DataUsers Conference Presentations. Understanding and Using NAMCS and NHAMCS Data: Data Tools and Basic Programming Techniques. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ahcd/ahcd_presentations.htm. Accessed FEb 21, 2012. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | U.K. Department of Health. The NHS Plan: A Plan for Investment, A Plan for Reform. The Stationary Office Limited, London, UK, 2000. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4002960. Accessed Feb 21, 2012. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. Position Statement on Emergency Department Overcrowding. Available at: http://caep.ca/sites/default/files/caep/files/edoc_position_statement_board_approved_june_2009_gl.pdf. Accessed Feb 21, 2012. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Manning WG, Basu A, Mullahy J. Generalized modeling approaches to risk adjustment of skewed outcomes data. J Health Econ. 2005; 24: 465 – 88. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Park CY, Lee MA, Epstein AJ. Variation in emergency department wait times for children by race/ethnicity and payment source. Health Serv Res. 2009; 44: 2022 – 39. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
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.