The American journal of emergency medicine · 2021
Evaluation of advanced practice provider related return visits to a pediatric emergency department and their outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hussain Batool, Kannikeswaran Nirupama, Mathew Reny, Arora Rajan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: While multiple studies have evaluated physician-related return visits (RVs) to a pediatric emergency department (PED) limited data exists for Advanced Practice Provider (APP)-related RVs, hence our study aimed to evaluate APP-related RVs and their outcomes in a PED.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 72-h RVs where clinical care was independently provided by an APP during the index visit from January 2018 to December 2019. We extracted patient demographics, index and return visits' characteristics and outcomes. Reasons for RVs were categorized as progression of illness, medication-related, callbacks and others. Index visits were assessed for any diagnostic errors; impact of which to the patient was classified as none, minor or major.
RESULTS: Our APP-related RV rate was 2.1% (653/30,328). 462 eligible RVs were included in the final analysis. Majority of RVs were for medical reasons (n = 442, 95.7%); lower acuity (Emergency Severity Index ≥3, n = 426, 92.2%); due to persistence/progression of illness (n = 403; 87.2%) with viral illness being the common diagnosis (n = 159; 34.4%). 12 (2.6%) RVs were secondary to callbacks (8 radiology callbacks; 4 false positive blood cultures). Diagnostic errors were noted in 14 (3%) encounters of which 3 resulted in a major impact; radiological (7 fractures) and ophthalmological (2 corneal abrasions and 2 foreign bodies) misses constituted the majority of these.
CONCLUSIONS: APP-related RVs for low acuity medical patients remain low and are associated with good outcomes. Diagnostic errors account for a minority of these RVs. Focused interventions targeting provider errors can further decrease these RVs.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 72-h RVs where clinical care was independently provided by an APP during the index visit from January 2018 to December 2019. We extracted patient demographics, index and return visits' characteristics and outcomes. Reasons for RVs were categorized as progression of illness, medication-related, callbacks and others. Index visits were assessed for any diagnostic errors; impact of which to the patient was classified as none, minor or major.
RESULTS: Our APP-related RV rate was 2.1% (653/30,328). 462 eligible RVs were included in the final analysis. Majority of RVs were for medical reasons (n = 442, 95.7%); lower acuity (Emergency Severity Index ≥3, n = 426, 92.2%); due to persistence/progression of illness (n = 403; 87.2%) with viral illness being the common diagnosis (n = 159; 34.4%). 12 (2.6%) RVs were secondary to callbacks (8 radiology callbacks; 4 false positive blood cultures). Diagnostic errors were noted in 14 (3%) encounters of which 3 resulted in a major impact; radiological (7 fractures) and ophthalmological (2 corneal abrasions and 2 foreign bodies) misses constituted the majority of these.
CONCLUSIONS: APP-related RVs for low acuity medical patients remain low and are associated with good outcomes. Diagnostic errors account for a minority of these RVs. Focused interventions targeting provider errors can further decrease these RVs.