Hospital determinants of emergency department left without being seen rates.

Renee Y Hsia, Steven M Asch, Robert E Weiss, David Zingmond, Li-Jung Liang, Weijuan Han, Heather McCreath, Benjamin C Sun
Author Information
  1. Renee Y Hsia: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. rhsia@sfghed.ucsf.edu

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The proportion of patients who leave without being seen in the emergency department (ED) is an outcome-oriented measure of impaired access to emergency care and represents the failure of an emergency care delivery system to meet its goals of providing care to those most in need. Little is known about variation in the amount of left without being seen or about hospital-level determinants. Such knowledge is necessary to target hospital-level interventions to improve access to emergency care. We seek to determine whether hospital-level socioeconomic status case mix or hospital structural characteristics are predictive of ED left without being seen rates.
METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of all acute-care, nonfederal hospitals in California that operated an ED in 2007, using data from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database and the US census. Our outcome of interest was whether a visit to a given hospital ED resulted in left without being seen. The proportion of left without being seen was measured by the number of left without being seen cases out of the total number of visits.
RESULTS: We studied 9.2 million ED visits to 262 hospitals in California. The percentage of left without being seen varied greatly over hospitals, ranging from 0% to 20.3%, with a median percentage of 2.6%. In multivariable analyses adjusting for hospital-level socioeconomic status case mix, visitors to EDs with a higher proportion of low-income and poorly insured patients experienced a higher risk of left without being seen. We found that the odds of an ED visit resulting in left without being seen increased by a factor of 1.15 for each 10-percentage-point increase in poorly insured patients, and odds of left without being seen decreased by a factor of 0.86 for each $10,000 increase in household income. When hospital structural characteristics were added to the model, county ownership, trauma center designation, and teaching program affiliation were positively associated with increased probability of left without being seen (odds ratio 2.09; 1.62, and 2.14, respectively), and these factors attenuated the association with insurance status.
CONCLUSION: Visitors to different EDs experience a large variation in their probability of left without being seen, and visitors to hospitals serving a high proportion of low-income and poorly insured patients are at disproportionately higher risk of leaving without being seen. Our findings suggest that there is room for substantial improvement in this outcome, and regional interventions can be targeted toward certain at-risk hospitals to improve access to emergency care.

References

  1. Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Oct;16(10):949-55 [PMID: 19799570]
  2. Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Jun 15;153(12):1222-6 [PMID: 11415958]
  3. Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Sep;42(3):317-23 [PMID: 12944882]
  4. CJEM. 2005 Mar;7(2):107-13 [PMID: 17355660]
  5. Acad Emerg Med. 2006 Aug;13(8):848-52 [PMID: 16670258]
  6. Emerg Med Australas. 2008 Aug;20(4):306-13 [PMID: 18782204]
  7. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Nov;8(11):1080-7 [PMID: 11691672]
  8. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Nov;8(11):1037-43 [PMID: 11691665]
  9. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010 Feb;149(2):187-188.e1 [PMID: 20103051]
  10. Ann Emerg Med. 1994 Feb;23(2):294-8 [PMID: 8304611]
  11. Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Oct;40(4):388-93 [PMID: 12239493]
  12. Ann Emerg Med. 1994 Dec;24(6):1092-6 [PMID: 7978590]
  13. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2006 Aug;22(8):550-4 [PMID: 16912621]
  14. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2007 Nov;33(11 Suppl):57-67 [PMID: 18173166]
  15. Health Serv Res. 1983 Spring;18(1):49-74 [PMID: 6841113]
  16. Emerg Med J. 2007 Mar;24(3):175-9 [PMID: 17351221]
  17. Ann Emerg Med. 1986 Jul;15(7):813-7 [PMID: 3729104]
  18. Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Feb;14(2):157-62 [PMID: 17185293]
  19. Am J Public Health. 1984 Dec;74(12):1331-9 [PMID: 6507684]
  20. J Community Health. 1984 Summer;9(4):261-8 [PMID: 6434597]
  21. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Dec;8(12):1179-81 [PMID: 11733298]
  22. Health Policy. 2008 Feb;85(2):207-17 [PMID: 17825940]
  23. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jan-Jun;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-136-42 [PMID: 15451990]
  24. Med Care. 1978 Jul;16(7):533-46 [PMID: 672266]
  25. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 Sep-Oct;26(5):1490-4 [PMID: 17848461]
  26. Health Serv Res. 1974 Fall;9(3):208-20 [PMID: 4436074]
  27. Am J Public Health. 1993 Mar;83(3):372-8 [PMID: 8438975]
  28. Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Jun;55(6):553-5 [PMID: 20494223]
  29. Ann Emerg Med. 1999 Sep;34(3):326-35 [PMID: 10459088]
  30. Ann Emerg Med. 2009 Feb;53(2):256-8 [PMID: 18824275]
  31. JAMA. 1991 Aug 28;266(8):1085-90 [PMID: 1865540]
  32. JAMA. 1991 Aug 28;266(8):1091-6 [PMID: 1865541]
  33. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 Sep-Oct;26(5):1459-68 [PMID: 17848458]
  34. J Emerg Med. 2007 Feb;32(2):211-5 [PMID: 17307641]
  35. Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Jun;55(6):544-552.e3 [PMID: 20138396]
  36. J Eval Clin Pract. 2001 Feb;7(1):35-45 [PMID: 11240838]
  37. Ann Emerg Med. 2009 Oct;54(4):511-3 [PMID: 19573948]
  38. Acad Emerg Med. 2005 Mar;12(3):232-6 [PMID: 15741586]
  39. Am J Emerg Med. 2006 Nov;24(7):787-94 [PMID: 17098098]
  40. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Nov;8(11):1095-100 [PMID: 11691675]
  41. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Dec;48(6):702-10 [PMID: 17112933]
  42. Adv Data. 2006 Sep 27;(376):1-23 [PMID: 17037024]
  43. Am J Emerg Med. 2000 Nov;18(7):767-72 [PMID: 11103726]
  44. Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Aug;42(2):167-72 [PMID: 12883503]
  45. Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Apr;39(4):389-96 [PMID: 11919525]

Grants

  1. P30-AG028748/NIA NIH HHS
  2. KL2 RR024130/NCRR NIH HHS
  3. P30 AG028748/NIA NIH HHS
  4. R03 HS018098/AHRQ HHS
  5. L60 MD002903-02/NIMHD NIH HHS
  6. R03 HS18098/AHRQ HHS
  7. L60 MD002903-01/NIMHD NIH HHS
  8. P30 AG028748-05/NIA NIH HHS
  9. L60 MD002903/NIMHD NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Adult
Analysis of Variance
California
Chi-Square Distribution
Diagnosis-Related Groups
Emergency Service, Hospital
Health Services Accessibility
Hospitals
Humans
Income
Male
Medically Uninsured
Minority Groups
Multivariate Analysis
Poverty
Retrospective Studies
Socioeconomic Factors

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0withoutseenleftemergencyEDcarehospitalsproportionpatientshospital-level2accessstatushospitalCaliforniahigherpoorlyinsuredoddsdepartmentvariationdeterminantsinterventionsimprovewhethersocioeconomiccasemixstructuralcharacteristicsratesoutcomevisitnumbervisitspercentagevisitorsEDslow-incomeriskincreasedfactor1increaseprobabilitySTUDYOBJECTIVE:leaveoutcome-orientedmeasureimpairedrepresentsfailuredeliverysystemmeetgoalsprovidingneedLittleknownamountknowledgenecessarytargetseekdeterminepredictiveMETHODS:performedcross-sectionalstudyacute-carenonfederaloperated2007usingdataOfficeStatewideHealthPlanningDevelopmentdatabaseUScensusinterestgivenresultedmeasuredcasestotalRESULTS:studied9million262variedgreatlyranging0%203%median6%multivariableanalysesadjustingexperiencedfoundresulting1510-percentage-pointdecreased086$10000householdincomeaddedmodelcountyownershiptraumacenterdesignationteachingprogramaffiliationpositivelyassociatedratio096214respectivelyfactorsattenuatedassociationinsuranceCONCLUSION:Visitorsdifferentexperiencelargeservinghighdisproportionatelyleavingfindingssuggestroomsubstantialimprovementregionalcantargetedtowardcertainat-riskHospital

Similar Articles

Cited By