Treatment, Management, and Otolaryngology Consultation for Epistaxis in the Emergency Room: An Institutional Experience.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-28 DOI:10.1177/19458924231223348
Daniel Jacobs, Vickie J Wang, Janet R Chao, R Peter Manes, Yan H Lee
{"title":"Treatment, Management, and Otolaryngology Consultation for Epistaxis in the Emergency Room: An Institutional Experience.","authors":"Daniel Jacobs, Vickie J Wang, Janet R Chao, R Peter Manes, Yan H Lee","doi":"10.1177/19458924231223348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Epistaxis is a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits, accounting for approximately 1 of every 200 ED visits in the United States annually and up to one-third of all otolaryngology (ENT)-related ED encounters.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To detail reasons for ENT consultation for epistaxis in the ED, understand how consultation impacts patient care, assess follow-up patterns after emergency care, and study patient care after transfer or referral into the ED.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective chart review of 592 adult patients with epistaxis managed in a tertiary care ED setting between 2017 and 2018. Patients with known follow-up, ENT consult in the ED, or admission were included, while patients with trauma, recent head and neck surgery, or abnormal anatomy were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common reasons for ENT consultation for epistaxis were for advanced management, referral to the ED from an outside facility or provider, and recent head and neck surgery. In total, 48.2% of patients treated for epistaxis in the ED received an ENT consultation. ENT consultation was associated with a higher likelihood of receiving absorbable or nonabsorbable packing (92.4% vs 36.1%). In total, 40.4% of patients referred into the ED from an outside facility or provider had no change in their management after receiving an ENT consult. Patients referred to the ED and White patients were significantly more likely to receive an ENT consult. Secondary analyses revealed that more White patients had an established outpatient ENT provider than patients of other races. On multivariate analysis, patients who received an ENT consult spent 75.2 min longer in the ED.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The high percentage of patients referred or transferred to the ED for epistaxis management with no change in interventions after ENT consultation indicates a continued need to develop more precise clinical care pathways. Additionally, there may be gaps between White and non-White patients in access to ENT care.</p>","PeriodicalId":7650,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","volume":" ","pages":"102-107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924231223348","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Epistaxis is a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits, accounting for approximately 1 of every 200 ED visits in the United States annually and up to one-third of all otolaryngology (ENT)-related ED encounters.

Objectives: To detail reasons for ENT consultation for epistaxis in the ED, understand how consultation impacts patient care, assess follow-up patterns after emergency care, and study patient care after transfer or referral into the ED.

Methods: Retrospective chart review of 592 adult patients with epistaxis managed in a tertiary care ED setting between 2017 and 2018. Patients with known follow-up, ENT consult in the ED, or admission were included, while patients with trauma, recent head and neck surgery, or abnormal anatomy were excluded.

Results: The most common reasons for ENT consultation for epistaxis were for advanced management, referral to the ED from an outside facility or provider, and recent head and neck surgery. In total, 48.2% of patients treated for epistaxis in the ED received an ENT consultation. ENT consultation was associated with a higher likelihood of receiving absorbable or nonabsorbable packing (92.4% vs 36.1%). In total, 40.4% of patients referred into the ED from an outside facility or provider had no change in their management after receiving an ENT consult. Patients referred to the ED and White patients were significantly more likely to receive an ENT consult. Secondary analyses revealed that more White patients had an established outpatient ENT provider than patients of other races. On multivariate analysis, patients who received an ENT consult spent 75.2 min longer in the ED.

Conclusion: The high percentage of patients referred or transferred to the ED for epistaxis management with no change in interventions after ENT consultation indicates a continued need to develop more precise clinical care pathways. Additionally, there may be gaps between White and non-White patients in access to ENT care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
急诊室鼻衄的治疗、处理和耳鼻喉科会诊:机构经验。
背景:鼻衄是急诊科(ED)就诊的常见原因,在美国每年每 200 例急诊就诊中就有 1 例鼻衄,占耳鼻喉科(ENT)相关急诊就诊总数的三分之一:详细了解急诊室耳鼻喉科鼻衄就诊的原因,了解就诊对患者护理的影响,评估急诊护理后的随访模式,并研究转入或转诊至急诊室后的患者护理:对 2017 年至 2018 年期间在三级医疗机构急诊室就诊的 592 名鼻衄成人患者进行回顾性病历审查。纳入已知随访、在急诊室接受耳鼻喉科会诊或入院的患者,排除外伤、近期头颈部手术或解剖异常的患者:耳鼻喉科会诊鼻衄最常见的原因是为了进行高级处理、从外部机构或医疗机构转诊到急诊室,以及近期进行了头颈部手术。在急诊室接受鼻衄治疗的患者中,共有 48.2% 接受过耳鼻喉科会诊。接受耳鼻喉科会诊的患者接受可吸收或不可吸收填料的可能性更高(92.4% 对 36.1%)。在从外部机构或医疗机构转诊到急诊室的患者中,共有40.4%的患者在接受耳鼻喉科会诊后,治疗方案没有发生变化。转诊到急诊科的患者和白人患者接受耳鼻喉科会诊的可能性明显更高。二次分析显示,与其他种族的患者相比,更多的白人患者拥有固定的耳鼻喉科门诊医疗机构。通过多变量分析,接受耳鼻喉科会诊的患者在急诊室的停留时间延长了 75.2 分钟:结论:因鼻衄转诊或转入急诊室治疗的患者比例很高,而耳鼻喉科会诊后的干预措施却没有改变,这表明仍有必要制定更精确的临床护理路径。此外,白人和非白人患者在获得耳鼻喉科护理方面可能存在差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
11.50%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication committed to expanding knowledge and publishing the best clinical and basic research within the fields of Rhinology & Allergy. Its focus is to publish information which contributes to improved quality of care for patients with nasal and sinus disorders. Its primary readership consists of otolaryngologists, allergists, and plastic surgeons. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials, and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Dupilumab Treatment for Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease in a Real-World Setting: Impact on Quality of Life and Healthcare Utilization. The Effect of the Nasal Structure on the Olfactory Cleft Airflow: A Systematic Review. Common Cold Coronavirus 229E Induces Higher Interferon Stimulating Gene Responses in Human Nasal Epithelial Cells from Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Polyposis. Doing the Rhinologic Work, From Humans to Mice to Robots. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Promotes Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase Expression Contributes to Development of Allergic Rhinitis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1