P128: Emergency physician efficiency benchmarking and diagnostic imaging use

Abstract

Introduction: As part of our audit and feedback process, Emergency Physicians (EP) are provided feedback on flow metrics and resource utilization. We analysed the relationship between two specific metrics (adjusted workload measurement (AWM), with the number of patients seen per hour adjusted according to CTAS, and percentage of revisits within 72 hours and diagnostic imaging use. Unfortunately, we are unable to evaluate quality of care, nor appropriateness of DI indication at this stage. Methods: We used data from 86 physicians at an academic ED, from June 1, 2015 to May31, 2017. The Data Envelope Analysis (DEA) model incorporated performance quality measures as outputs and efficiency measures as inputs. DEA is a method widely used in physician performance analysis. The method provides a score (optimal performance efficiency-OPE) for each EP based on maximization of the performance (AWM) in proportion to the combination of efficient use of resources, diagnostic imaging (DI). The score was used to regress against demographic characteristics and training. Results: The median AWM was 6.8 (quartiles Q1-Q3 = 6.4-7.4) with the median diagnostic imaging use of percentages of CT (median = 10.1, 8.6-11.9), US (median = 4.7, 3.6-5.6) and x-ray (80, 74-84). The EPs who had highest AWM combined with least use of DI (OPE = 100%), provided median AWM of 9.1 (range 8.9-9.7) with percentage CT, US and x-ray medians at 5.8% (range 5.8-6.2), 2.7% (range 2.4-3.6) and 59% (range 59-72). These provided benchmarks for optimal performance indicators. We found statistically significant differences of OPE scores based on gender (men 4.1 times higher, p < 0.001) and degree (RCPS < CCFPEM, Other < CCFPEM, p < 0.001). Overall AWM diminishes at the rate of 14% (95%CI: 9-20%) for a combination of 100 DI tests ordered. In order to reach the optimal level of performance, to reach an OPE of 100%, the median CT use percentage needs to be reduced by 6% (quartile range 3.9- 7.7%), US by 2.2% (quartile range 1.5-3.4%) and x-rays by 37.2% (quartile range: 26.8-44.3%). Return visit rates were not associated with DI use, possibly due to homogeneity in the percentage of return visits. Conclusion: We found significant performance variations in terms of average workload measurement in proportion to the weighted average of diagnostic imaging use, with increased use of DI being associated with decreasing AWM. Percentage of return visits does not appear to be useful as a performance indicator.