Public Health Interventions in the Emergency Department: A Framework for Evaluation.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.5811/westjem.18316
Elisabeth Fassas, Kyle Fischer, Stephen Schenkel, John David Gatz, Daniel B Gingold
{"title":"Public Health Interventions in the Emergency Department: A Framework for Evaluation.","authors":"Elisabeth Fassas, Kyle Fischer, Stephen Schenkel, John David Gatz, Daniel B Gingold","doi":"10.5811/westjem.18316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Emergency departments (ED) in the United States serve a dual role in public health: a portal of entry to the health system and a safety net for the community at large. Public health officials often target the ED for public health interventions due to the perception that it is uniquely able to reach underserved populations. However, under time and resource constraints, emergency physicians and public health officials must make calculated decisions in choosing which interventions in their local context could provide maximal impact to achieve public health benefit. We identify how decisions regarding public health interventions are affected by considerations of cost, time, and available personnel, and further consider the role of local community needs, health department goals, and political environment. We describe a sample of ED-based public health interventions and demonstrate how to use a proposed framework to assess interventions. We posit a series of questions and variables to consider: local disease prevalence; ability of the ED to perform the intervention; relative efficacy of the ED vs community partnerships as the primary intervention location; and expected outcomes. In using this framework, clinicians should be empowered to improve the public health in their communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11112666/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18316","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Emergency departments (ED) in the United States serve a dual role in public health: a portal of entry to the health system and a safety net for the community at large. Public health officials often target the ED for public health interventions due to the perception that it is uniquely able to reach underserved populations. However, under time and resource constraints, emergency physicians and public health officials must make calculated decisions in choosing which interventions in their local context could provide maximal impact to achieve public health benefit. We identify how decisions regarding public health interventions are affected by considerations of cost, time, and available personnel, and further consider the role of local community needs, health department goals, and political environment. We describe a sample of ED-based public health interventions and demonstrate how to use a proposed framework to assess interventions. We posit a series of questions and variables to consider: local disease prevalence; ability of the ED to perform the intervention; relative efficacy of the ED vs community partnerships as the primary intervention location; and expected outcomes. In using this framework, clinicians should be empowered to improve the public health in their communities.

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
急诊科的公共卫生干预措施:评估框架》。
美国的急诊科(ED)在公共卫生中扮演着双重角色:既是进入医疗系统的入口,也是整个社区的安全网。公共卫生官员通常会将急诊室作为公共卫生干预的目标,因为他们认为急诊室能够为得不到充分服务的人群提供独特的服务。然而,在时间和资源有限的情况下,急诊医生和公共卫生官员必须经过深思熟虑后做出决定,选择在当地范围内采取哪些干预措施,才能发挥最大作用,实现公共卫生效益。我们明确了有关公共卫生干预措施的决策如何受到成本、时间和可用人员等因素的影响,并进一步考虑了当地社区需求、卫生部门目标和政治环境的作用。我们描述了基于急诊室的公共卫生干预样本,并演示了如何使用建议的框架来评估干预措施。我们提出了一系列需要考虑的问题和变量:当地疾病流行情况;急诊室实施干预的能力;急诊室与社区合作作为主要干预地点的相对有效性;以及预期结果。在使用此框架时,临床医生应有权改善其所在社区的公共卫生状况。
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
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
125
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Prehospital Ultrasound Training on Simulated Paramedic Clinical Decision-Making. Interfacility Patient Transfers During COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed-Methods Study. Making A Difference: Launching a Multimodal, Resident-Run Social Emergency Medicine Program. Methadone Initiation in the Emergency Department for Opioid Use Disorder. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Sepsis in Adult Patients Meeting Two or More Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria.
×
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