Critical revisits after discharge from the emergency department.

IF 2 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE International Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1186/s12245-025-00847-x
Zhenghong Liu, Raziyeh Mohammadi, Seyed Ehsan Saffari, Wei Lin Tallie Chua, Mingwei Ng, Fahad Javaid Siddiqui, Marcus Eng Hock Ong
{"title":"Critical revisits after discharge from the emergency department.","authors":"Zhenghong Liu, Raziyeh Mohammadi, Seyed Ehsan Saffari, Wei Lin Tallie Chua, Mingwei Ng, Fahad Javaid Siddiqui, Marcus Eng Hock Ong","doi":"10.1186/s12245-025-00847-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Emergency department (ED) revisits within 72 h is a standard quality measure for emergency care but most revisits are managed and discharged. However, a sub-group of revisits are due to clinical deterioration resulting in admissions to higher acuity care or even mortality. We aimed to identify these critical revisits and their associated risk factors. Identification of these factors would allow development of strategies to reduce incidence of post discharge deterioration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all patients who had a revisit within 72 h of discharge from the ED of a tertiary hospital in Singapore from 2008 to 2020. Deidentified data were extracted from the electronic health records (EHR). We identified critical revisits, defined as a revisit that resulted in death or admission to Intensive Care Unit or High Dependency. These patients were compared to patients who had a revisit that resulted in discharge or admission to general ward. The main outcome was the rate of critical revisit. We also determined the commonest index and critical revisit ED diagnosis as well as factors associated with critical revisits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 1,057,533 discharges from the ED over the study period, 44,506 (4.2%) had a revisit within 72 h, of which 1321 (0.12%) were critical revisits. Adjusted odds ratios from multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that higher heart rate, higher mean arterial pressure, and several lab abnormalities were associated with critical revisits. Diagnosis categories at the initial visit with the highest contribution to the likelihood of a critical revisit included \"acute cerebrovascular disease\" (OR: 38.00, 95%CI: 27.04-53.39), \"other gastrointestinal disorders\" (OR: 3.10, 95%CI: 2.41-3.99) and \"residual codes; unclassified\" (OR: 2.69, 95%CI: 2.01-3.60).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Critical revisits after discharge were rare in our study population, most prevalent amongst the elderly with multiple comorbidities. Future research should focus on diagnoses at higher risk of a critical revisit to develop practical approaches to follow up these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":13967,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"18 1","pages":"41"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874766/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-025-00847-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Emergency department (ED) revisits within 72 h is a standard quality measure for emergency care but most revisits are managed and discharged. However, a sub-group of revisits are due to clinical deterioration resulting in admissions to higher acuity care or even mortality. We aimed to identify these critical revisits and their associated risk factors. Identification of these factors would allow development of strategies to reduce incidence of post discharge deterioration.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all patients who had a revisit within 72 h of discharge from the ED of a tertiary hospital in Singapore from 2008 to 2020. Deidentified data were extracted from the electronic health records (EHR). We identified critical revisits, defined as a revisit that resulted in death or admission to Intensive Care Unit or High Dependency. These patients were compared to patients who had a revisit that resulted in discharge or admission to general ward. The main outcome was the rate of critical revisit. We also determined the commonest index and critical revisit ED diagnosis as well as factors associated with critical revisits.

Results: Out of 1,057,533 discharges from the ED over the study period, 44,506 (4.2%) had a revisit within 72 h, of which 1321 (0.12%) were critical revisits. Adjusted odds ratios from multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that higher heart rate, higher mean arterial pressure, and several lab abnormalities were associated with critical revisits. Diagnosis categories at the initial visit with the highest contribution to the likelihood of a critical revisit included "acute cerebrovascular disease" (OR: 38.00, 95%CI: 27.04-53.39), "other gastrointestinal disorders" (OR: 3.10, 95%CI: 2.41-3.99) and "residual codes; unclassified" (OR: 2.69, 95%CI: 2.01-3.60).

Conclusion: Critical revisits after discharge were rare in our study population, most prevalent amongst the elderly with multiple comorbidities. Future research should focus on diagnoses at higher risk of a critical revisit to develop practical approaches to follow up these patients.

Abstract Image

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
从急诊科出院后的重访。
目的:急诊部门(ED)在72小时内的回访是一个标准的质量措施的紧急护理,但大多数回访是管理和出院。然而,复诊的一个亚组是由于临床恶化导致入院更高的视力护理,甚至死亡。我们的目的是确定这些关键的重访及其相关的风险因素。查明这些因素将有助于制定减少出院后病情恶化发生率的战略。方法:回顾性队列研究对2008年至2020年新加坡某三级医院急诊出院后72小时内再次就诊的所有患者进行研究。从电子健康记录(EHR)中提取去识别数据。我们确定了重症重访,定义为导致死亡或进入重症监护病房或高度依赖的重访。将这些患者与复诊导致出院或进入普通病房的患者进行比较。主要的结果是关键的重访率。我们还确定了最常见的指标和关键重访ED诊断以及与关键重访相关的因素。结果:在研究期间,从急诊科出院的1,057,533例患者中,44,506例(4.2%)在72小时内再次就诊,其中1321例(0.12%)为重症患者。多变量logistic回归分析的校正优势比表明,较高的心率、较高的平均动脉压和一些实验室异常与危重复诊有关。初次就诊时,对重访可能性贡献最大的诊断类别包括“急性脑血管疾病”(OR: 38.00, 95%CI: 27.04-53.39)、“其他胃肠道疾病”(OR: 3.10, 95%CI: 2.41-3.99)和“残留代码”;(OR: 2.69, 95%CI: 2.01-3.60)。结论:出院后重诊在我们的研究人群中很少见,最常见的是有多种合并症的老年人。未来的研究应集中在高风险的诊断上,以制定切实可行的方法来随访这些患者。
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
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of the journal is to bring to light the various clinical advancements and research developments attained over the world and thus help the specialty forge ahead. It is directed towards physicians and medical personnel undergoing training or working within the field of Emergency Medicine. Medical students who are interested in pursuing a career in Emergency Medicine will also benefit from the journal. This is particularly useful for trainees in countries where the specialty is still in its infancy. Disciplines covered will include interesting clinical cases, the latest evidence-based practice and research developments in Emergency medicine including emergency pediatrics.
期刊最新文献
Operationalizing preparedness: bridging the "Know-Do" gap in Rwanda's infectious disease policy. Achieving door-to-balloon time ≤ 90 minutes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a retrospective clinical audit from a tertiary care centre in India. Overuse of imaging for pulmonary embolism in emergency departments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Application of HEART, GRACE 2.0 and TIMI scores for risk stratification of chest pain: a single-centre external pilot study in a Sri Lankan population. Prehospital assessment of perinatal patients by ambulance clinicians: development, implementation, review and national application.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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