Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:23:27.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in emergency department visits for conditions that may be treated in alternative primary care settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Chris A. Altmayer ,
Sten Ardal ,
Graham L. Woodward  and
Michael J. Schull
Chris A. Altmayer*
Affiliation:
HCM Group, Inc., Mississauga, Ont.
Sten Ardal
Affiliation:
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ont.
Graham L. Woodward
Affiliation:
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ont.
Michael J. Schull
Affiliation:
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ont. Department of Emergency Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ont.; and Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
*
HCM Group, Inc., 26 Cammay Ave., Dundas ON L9H 6M5

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.

The purpose of this report is to examine Ontario's geographic variation in emergency department (ED) visits for conditions that may be treated in alternative primary care settings. We studied all visits to Ontario EDs in 2002/03 and calculated county-specific age-standardized rates. Overall in Ontario, there were 3174 ED visits per 100 000 population aged 1-74 for conditions that could be treated in alternate primary care settings, but rates varied widely across counties. They were higher in rural counties with rates up to 7-fold higher than the provincial average. Urban counties had lower rates, some were less than one-third of the provincial average. Further research is needed to determine the relationship between ED utilization and primary care capacity.

Keywords

emergency departmentutilizationgeographic variationprimary care
Type
ED Administration • L’administration de la MU
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , July 2005 , pp. 252 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2005

References

1.Chan, BTB, Schull, MJ, Schultz, S. Emergency department services in Ontario 1993–2000. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2001.Google Scholar
2.Statistics Canada. Health indicators. Cat no 82–221-XIE, vol 2005, no 1. Available: http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/82-221-XIE/82-221-XIE2004002.htm (accessed 2005 April 29).Google Scholar
3.Ontario District Health Councils Local Health System Monitoring Technical Working Group. Access, equity & integration indicators for local health system monitoring in Ontario. Toronto: Ontario District Health Councils; 2004.Google Scholar
4.Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Provincial Health Planning Database [secure database]. Toronto: The Ministry. Accessed 2004 Oct.Google Scholar
5.Beveridge, R, Clarke, B, Janes, L, Savage, N, Thompson, J, Dodd, G, et al.Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale: implementation guidelines. Can J Emerg Med 1999;1(3 suppl). Online version available at: http://www.caep.ca/002.policies/002-02.ctas.htm (accessed 8 June 2005).Google Scholar
6.Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians and National Emergency Nurses Affiliation. Joint Position Statement on emergency department overcrowding [policy]. Can J Emerg Med 2001;3(2):82–4.Google Scholar
7.Vertesi, L. Does the Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale identify non-urgent patients who can be triaged away from the emergency department? Can J Emerg Med 2004;6(5):337–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed