Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:36:09.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Defining, quantifying, and characterizing adult frequent users of a suburban Canadian emergency department

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2015

Jessica Moe ,
Allan L. Bailey ,
Ryan Oland ,
Linda Levesque  and
Heather Murray
Jessica Moe*
Affiliation:
RCPSC EmergencyMedicine Residency Program, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
Allan L. Bailey
Affiliation:
WestView Physician Collaborative and WestViewPrimary Care Network; Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta
Ryan Oland
Affiliation:
WestView Health Centre, WestView Physician Collaborative and WestView Primary Care Network; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
Linda Levesque
Affiliation:
Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON
Heather Murray
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine and Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON
*
RCPSC Emergency Medicine Residency Program, University of Alberta, 750 University Terrace, 8303 - 112 Street, Edmonton, AB T6G 2T4; [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction:

Frequent emergency department (ED) users are inconsistently defined and poorly studied in Canada. The purpose of this study was to develop uniform definitions, quantify ED burden, and characterize adult frequent users of a suburban community ED.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed the administrative database of the WestView ED in Alberta for patients ≥ 18 years of age presenting during the fiscal year of 2010. Adult frequent users and extreme frequent users were defined as patients with yearly visit numbers greater than the 95th and 99th percentiles, respectively. Demographic information including age, sex, ED length of stay, diagnoses, Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) level, and disposition were collected and stratified by ED frequency of use categories.

Results:

The study included 22,333 ED visits by 14,223 patients. Frequent users represented 3.1% of patients and 13.8% of visits. Extreme frequent users represented 0.8% of patients, 5.4% of visits, and 568,879 cumulative ED minutes (395 days). Nonfrequent users had one to four, frequent users had five or more, and extreme frequent users had eight or more visits over a 12-month period. Frequent users and extreme frequent users had a significantly longer ED length of stay overall and in most age categories. Alcohol-related behavioural disorders, anxiety, nausea/vomiting, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were prominent diagnoses, suggesting that psychiatric, somatic, and chronic illnesses may underlie recurrent visits. Admission rates were significantly higher for frequent compared to nonfrequent users.

Conclusions:

We propose reproducible definitions for adult frequent and extreme frequent ED users and provide information on the characteristics and burden of care of these groups at a community Canadian suburban ED. Adoption of these definitions would allow comparison across centres in future research and facilitate targeted interventions for frequent and extreme frequent ED users.

Keywords

emergency medical servicesemergency medicineemergency servicefrequent emergency department usershealth care costshealth care qualityaccessevaluationhealth services' needs and demandshospitaloveruse of health services
Type
Original Research • Recherche originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 214 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2013

References

REFERENCES

1.LaCalle, E, Rabin, E. Frequent users of emergency departments: the myths, the data and the policy implications. Ann Emerg Med 2010;56:42–8, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.01.032.Google Scholar
2.Peppe, EM, Mays, JW, Chang, HC, et al. Characteristics of frequent emergency department users. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2007. Available from: (accessed May 3, 2012).Google Scholar
3.Curran, GM, Sullivan, G, Williams, K, et al. The association of psychiatric comorbidity and use of the emergency department among persons with substance use disorders: an observational cohort study. BMC Emerg Med 2008;8:17, doi:10.1186/1471-227X-8-17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Kerr, T, Wood, E, Grafstein, E, et al. High rates of primary care and emergency department use among injection drug use in Vancouver. J Public Health (Oxf) 2005;27:62–6, doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdh189.Google Scholar
5.Kne, T, Young, R, Spillane, L. Frequent ED users: patterns of use over time. Am J Emerg Med 1998;16:648–52, doi:10.1016/S0735-6757(98)90166-8.Google Scholar
6.McCusker, J, Karp, I, Cardin, S. Determinants of emergency visits by older adults: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:1362–70, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00011.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Milbrett, P, Halm, M. Characteristics and predictors of frequent utilization of emergency services. J Emerg Nurs 2009;35:191–8, doi:10.1016/j.jen.2008.04.032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Sandoval, E, Smith, S, Walter, J, et al. A comparison of frequent and infrequent visitors to an urban emergency department. J Emerg Med 2010;38:115–21, doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.09.042.Google Scholar
9.Sun, BC, Burstin, HR, Brennan, TA. Predictors and outcomes of frequent emergency department users. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:320–8, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb01344.x.Google Scholar
10.Zuckerman, S, Shen, YC. Characteristics of occasional and frequent emergency department users: do insurance coverage and access to care matter? Med Care 2004;42:176–82, doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000108747.51198.41.Google Scholar
11.Riggs, JE, Davis, SM, Hobbs, GR, et al. Association between early returns and frequent ED visits at a rural academic medical centre. Am J Emerg Med 2003;21:30–1, doi:10.1053/ajem.2003.50017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Ruger, JP, Richter, CJ, Spitznagel, EL, et al. Analysis of costs, length of stay, and utilization of emergency department services by frequent users: implications for health policy. Acad Emerg Med 2004;11:1311–7, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2004.tb01919.x.Google Scholar
13.Althaus, F, Paroz, S, Hugli, O, et al. Effectiveness of interventions targeting frequent users of emergency departments: a systematic review. Ann Emerg Med 2011;58:41–52, doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.007.Google Scholar
14.McCusker, J, Cardin, S, Bellavance, F, et al. Return to the emergency department among elders: patterns and predictors. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:249–59, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb01070.x.Google Scholar
15.McCusker, J, Ionescu-Ittu, R, Ciampi, A, et al. Hospital characteristics and emergency department care of older patients are associated with return visits. Acad Emerg Med 2007;14:426–33.Google Scholar
16.Grover, CA, Close, RJH, Villarreal, K, et al. Emergency department frequent user: pilot study intensive case management to reduce visits and computed tomography. West J Emerg Med 2010;11:336–43.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Hansagi, H, Olsson, M, Hussain, A, et al. Is information sharing between the emergency department and primary care useful to the care of frequent emergency department users? Eur J Emerg Med 2008;15:34–9, doi:10.1097/MEJ.0b013e3282aa4115.Google Scholar
18.Lee, KH, Davenport, L. Can case management interventions reduce the number of emergency department visits by frequent users? Health Care Manager 2006;25:155–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Michelen, W, Martinez, J, Lee, A, et al. Reducing frequent flyer emergency department visits. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2006;17:59–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Phillips, GA, Brophy, DS, Weiland, TJ, et al. The effect of multidisciplinary case management on selected outcomes for frequent attenders at an emergency department. Med J Aust 2006;184:602–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Pope, D, Fernandes, CMB, Bouthillette, F, et al. Frequent users of the emergency department: a program to improve care and reduce visits. CMAJ 2000;162:1017–20.Google Scholar
22.McCusker, J, Healey, E, Bellavance, F, et al. Predictors of repeat emergency department visits by elders. Acad Emerg Med 1997;4:581–8, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.1997.tb03582.x.Google Scholar
23.WestView Primary Care Network. WestView Primary Care Network Business Plan, 2008–2014 [internal document]. Spruce Grove, AB: WestView Primary Care Network; 2008.Google Scholar
24.Canadian Institute for Health Information. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems: tenth revision, volume one – tabular list. Ottawa: CIHI; 2009.Google Scholar
25.Canadian Institute of Health Information. Data quality documentation for external users: National Ambulatory Care Reporting System, 2010–2011. Ottawa: CIHI; 2011.Google Scholar
26.Gibson, D, Richards, H, Chapman, A. The National Ambulatory Care Reporting System: factors that affect the quality of its emergency data. Int J Inform Qual 2008;2:97–114, doi:10.1504/IJIQ.2008.022958.Google Scholar
27.Alberta Health and Wellness. Alberta Health and Wellness Ambulatory Care Re-abstraction Study executive report. 2006. Available from: (accessed May 3, 2012).Google Scholar
28.Abbass, A, Campbell, S, Magee, K, et al. Intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy to reduce rates of emergency department return visits for patients with medically unexplained symptoms: preliminary evidence from a pre-post intervention study. CJEM 2009;11:529–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29.Khan, Y, Glazier, RH, Moineddin, R, et al. A populationbased study of the association between socioeconomic status and emergency department utilization in Ontario, Canada. Acad Emerg Med 2011;18:836–43, doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01127.x.Google Scholar
30. Kroner, EL, Hoffmann, RG, Brousseau, DC. Emergency department reliance: a discriminatory measure of frequent emergency department users. Pediatrics 2010;125:133–8, doi:10.1542/peds.2009-0960.Google Scholar
31.Iezzoni, L. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:666–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed