Variation in Consult and Referral Patterns for Facial Lacerations by Emergency Department Provider Type: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Zachary Edward Lawrence, Sydney Bormann, Li Cao, Hoang Lawrence Nguyen
{"title":"Variation in Consult and Referral Patterns for Facial Lacerations by Emergency Department Provider Type: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Zachary Edward Lawrence, Sydney Bormann, Li Cao, Hoang Lawrence Nguyen","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Facial lacerations are a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits in the U.S. Proper laceration repair is imperative as poor wound management can lead to functional and aesthetic impairment and significantly impact patient quality of life. For the best outcomes and long-term scar reduction, treatment by and follow-up with a plastic surgeon or facial trauma specialist is recommended. The present study examines variations in facial trauma specialist consultation and referral by ED provider type for adult patients at hospitals within a large rural South Dakota health system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Records for patients above the age of 18 who received treatment for facial lacerations between January 1, 2017 and January 1, 2022 were retrospectively reviewed across multiple hospitals in South Dakota, spanning a large rural catchment area. Multivariable logistic regression and Fisher's exact test were performed to examine the relationship between ED provider type and the probability of receiving specialty consult and/or referral.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred fifty-four ED visits were included in the analysis. Among these patients, 53 received specialty consult and/or follow-up referral and 101 were treated without consult or referral. ED provider type was significantly associated with the probability of having a specialty consult (OR = 5.11, 95% CI [1.05, 24.96]). When the patients had a certified nurse practitioner (CNP) as their ED provider, they had a significantly higher chance (40%) of receiving specialist consultation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients presenting to the ED with facial lacerations, facial trauma specialist consultation and referral for follow up varies based on provider type. CNPs placed specialist consultations more often than other ED provider types.</p>","PeriodicalId":39219,"journal":{"name":"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association","volume":"77 6","pages":"252-256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Facial lacerations are a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits in the U.S. Proper laceration repair is imperative as poor wound management can lead to functional and aesthetic impairment and significantly impact patient quality of life. For the best outcomes and long-term scar reduction, treatment by and follow-up with a plastic surgeon or facial trauma specialist is recommended. The present study examines variations in facial trauma specialist consultation and referral by ED provider type for adult patients at hospitals within a large rural South Dakota health system.

Methods: Records for patients above the age of 18 who received treatment for facial lacerations between January 1, 2017 and January 1, 2022 were retrospectively reviewed across multiple hospitals in South Dakota, spanning a large rural catchment area. Multivariable logistic regression and Fisher's exact test were performed to examine the relationship between ED provider type and the probability of receiving specialty consult and/or referral.

Results: One hundred fifty-four ED visits were included in the analysis. Among these patients, 53 received specialty consult and/or follow-up referral and 101 were treated without consult or referral. ED provider type was significantly associated with the probability of having a specialty consult (OR = 5.11, 95% CI [1.05, 24.96]). When the patients had a certified nurse practitioner (CNP) as their ED provider, they had a significantly higher chance (40%) of receiving specialist consultation.

Conclusion: For patients presenting to the ED with facial lacerations, facial trauma specialist consultation and referral for follow up varies based on provider type. CNPs placed specialist consultations more often than other ED provider types.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
按急诊科提供者类型划分的面部撕裂伤就诊和转诊模式差异:回顾性队列研究。
简介:在美国,面部撕裂伤是急诊科(ED)就诊的常见原因之一。适当的撕裂伤修复至关重要,因为伤口处理不当会导致功能和美观受损,严重影响患者的生活质量。为了获得最佳疗效并长期减少疤痕,建议由整形外科医生或面部创伤专家进行治疗和随访。本研究探讨了南达科他州一个大型农村医疗系统内医院的成人患者在接受面部创伤专科医生会诊和转诊方面的差异:回顾性审查了南达科他州多家医院在 2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 1 月 1 日期间因面部撕裂伤接受治疗的 18 岁以上患者的记录,这些医院横跨一个大型农村集水区。研究人员通过多变量逻辑回归和费雪精确检验来检验急诊室提供者类型与接受专科会诊和/或转诊概率之间的关系:结果:154 名急诊室就诊者被纳入分析范围。在这些患者中,53 人接受了专科会诊和/或后续转诊,101 人未接受会诊或转诊。急诊室医疗服务提供者的类型与接受专科会诊的概率明显相关(OR = 5.11,95% CI [1.05,24.96])。如果患者的急诊室提供者是注册执业护士(CNP),则他们接受专科会诊的几率明显更高(40%):结论:对于因面部撕裂伤到急诊室就诊的患者,面部创伤专家会诊和转诊复查的情况因医疗服务提供者的类型而异。与其他急诊室医疗服务提供者相比,全科医生更常安排专家会诊。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
期刊最新文献
Renal Cell Carcinoma with a Catastrophic Thrombus: A Case Report. The Pharmaceutical Future of Remimazolam as Compared to Propofol and Midazolam: A Literature Review. The Posterior Triangle and Posterior Muscles of the Neck in 3-Dimensions: Creating a Digital Anatomic Model Using Peer-Reviewed Literature, Radiographic Imaging, and an Experienced Medical Illustrator. Acute Arthritis Presentations of Gonorrhea and Syphilis - A Concise Update. Atypical Presentation of Severe Bullous Pemphigoid: A Case Report.
×
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