» Articles » PMID: 33413163

Health Care Providers' Perception of the Frequent Emergency Department User Issue and of Targeted Case Management Interventions: a Cross-sectional National Survey in Switzerland

Overview
Journal BMC Emerg Med
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Emergency Medicine
Date 2021 Jan 8
PMID 33413163
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Frequent users of emergency departments (FUEDs) (≥5 ED visits/year) represent a vulnerable population with complex needs accounting for a significant number of emergency department (ED) consultations, thus contributing to EDs overcrowding. Research exploring ED staff perceptions of FUEDs is scarce.

Objectives: The current study aimed to evaluate in ED staff a) the extent to which FUEDs are perceived as an issue; b) their perceived levels of knowledge and understanding of FUEDs; c) levels of perceived usefulness of case management (CM) and interest in implementing this intervention in their ED service.

Methods: Head physicians of the EDs at all public hospitals in Switzerland (of various level of specialization) were sent a 19-item web-based survey, pilot tested prior to its dissemination. The head physicians were asked to forward the survey to ED staff members from different health professional backgrounds.

Results: The hospital response rate was 81% (85/106). The exploitable hospital response rate was 71% (75/106 hospitals) including 208 responding health professionals. Issues and difficulties around FUEDs were perceived as important by 64% of respondents. The perceived frequency of being confronted with FUEDs was higher among nurses in more specialized EDs. In total, 64% of respondents felt poorly informed about FUEDs, nurses feeling less informed than physicians. The understanding of FUEDs was lower in the French-Italian-speaking parts (FISP) of Switzerland than in the German-speaking part. Eighty-one percent of respondents had no precise knowledge of FUED-related interventions. The perceived usefulness of CM interventions after receiving explanations about it was high (92%). However, the overall level of interest for CM implementation was 59%. The interest in CM by physicians was low across all regions and ED categories. Nurses, on the other hand, showed more interest, especially those in EDs of high specialization.

Conclusions: The majority of ED staff reported being confronted with FUEDs on a regular basis. Staff perceived FUEDs as a vulnerable population, yet, they felt poorly informed about how to manage the issue. The majority of ED staff thought a CM intervention would be useful for FUEDs, however there appears to be a gap in their desire or willingness to implement such interventions.

Citing Articles

Unveiling the patterns: exploring social and clinical characteristics of frequent mental health visits to the emergency department-a comprehensive systematic review.

Zhang Z, Das S Discov Ment Health. 2024; 4(1):17.

PMID: 38802580 PMC: 11130112. DOI: 10.1007/s44192-024-00070-9.


Experiences of Frequent Users of Emergency Departments in Health Care Setting in French-Speaking Switzerland: A Qualitative Study.

Graells M, Schaad L, Schmutz E, Moullin J, Hugli O, Daeppen J Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(9).

PMID: 37174770 PMC: 10178271. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11091228.


Understanding the experience in the healthcare system of non-migrant and migrant frequent users of the emergency department in French-speaking Switzerland: a comparative qualitative study.

Cariello C, Grazioli V, Nikles J, Schmutz E, Hugli O, Bodenmann P BMJ Open. 2023; 13(4):e069272.

PMID: 37094894 PMC: 10151913. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069272.


Methodological approaches to study context in intervention implementation studies: an evidence gap map.

Mielke J, Brunkert T, Zuniga F, Simon M, Zullig L, de Geest S BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022; 22(1):320.

PMID: 36517765 PMC: 9749183. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01772-w.


An Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Case Management in Clinical Nursing Education.

Liang Y, Xie J, Chen X Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021; 14:3597-3603.

PMID: 34475791 PMC: 8407781. DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S308144.


References
1.
Birmingham L, Cochran T, Frey J, Stiffler K, Wilber S . Emergency department use and barriers to wellness: a survey of emergency department frequent users. BMC Emerg Med. 2017; 17(1):16. PMC: 5424308. DOI: 10.1186/s12873-017-0126-5. View

2.
Grazioli V, Moullin J, Kasztura M, Canepa-Allen M, Hugli O, Griffin J . Implementing a case management intervention for frequent users of the emergency department (I-CaM): an effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial study protocol. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19(1):28. PMC: 6330435. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3852-9. View

3.
Morgan S, Chang A, Alqatari M, Pines J . Non-emergency department interventions to reduce ED utilization: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med. 2013; 20(10):969-85. PMC: 4038086. DOI: 10.1111/acem.12219. View

4.
Kai J, Beavan J, Faull C, Dodson L, Gill P, Beighton A . Professional uncertainty and disempowerment responding to ethnic diversity in health care: a qualitative study. PLoS Med. 2007; 4(11):e323. PMC: 2071935. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040323. View

5.
Van Tiel S, Rood P, Bertoli-Avella A, Erasmus V, Haagsma J, van Beeck E . Systematic review of frequent users of emergency departments in non-US hospitals: state of the art. Eur J Emerg Med. 2015; 22(5):306-15. DOI: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000242. View