» Articles » PMID: 35392826

Pathways to the Emergency Department - a National, Cross-sectional Study in Sweden

Overview
Journal BMC Emerg Med
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Emergency Medicine
Date 2022 Apr 8
PMID 35392826
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Swedish Emergency Departments (EDs) see 2.6 million visits annually. Sweden has a strong tradition of health care databases, but information on patients' pathways to the ED is not documented in any registry. The aim of this study was to provide a national overview of pathways, degree of medical acuteness according to triage, chief complaints, and hospital admission rates for adult patients (≥18 years) visiting Swedish EDs during 24 h.

Methods: A national cross-sectional study including all patients at 43 of Sweden's 72 EDs during 24 h on April 25th, 2018. Pathway to the ED, medical acuteness at triage, admission and basic demographics were registered by dedicated assessors present at every ED for the duration of the study. Descriptive data are reported.

Results: A total of 3875 adult patients (median age 59; range 18 to 107; 50% men) were included in the study. Complete data for pathway to the ED was reported for 3693 patients (98%). The most common pathway was self-referred walk-in (n = 1310; 34%), followed by ambulance (n = 920; 24%), referral from a general practitioner (n = 497; 1 3%), and telephone referral by the national medical helpline "1177" (n = 409; 10%). In patients 18 to 64 years, self-referred walk-in was most common, whereas transport by ambulance dominated in patients > 64 years. Of the 3365 patients who received a medical acuteness level at triage, 4% were classified as Red (Immediate), 18% as Orange (very urgent), 47% as Yellow (Urgent), 26% as Green (Standard), and 5% as Blue (Non-Urgent). Abdominal or chest pain were the most common chief complaints representing approximately 1/3 of all presentations. Overall, the admission rate was 27%. Arrival by ambulance was associated with the highest rate of admission (53%), whereas walk-in patients and telephone referrals were less often admitted.

Conclusion: Self-referred walk-in was the overall most common pathway followed by ambulance. Patients arriving by ambulance were often elderly, critically ill and often admitted to in-patient care, whereas arrival by self-referred walk-in was more common in younger patients.

Citing Articles

Activity, triage levels and impact of the pandemic on hospital emergency departments: A multicentre cross-sectional study.

Font-Cabrera C, Juve-Udina M, Adamuz J, Diaz Membrives M, Fabrellas N, Guix-Comellas E J Adv Nurs. 2024; 81(3):1332-1342.

PMID: 39032172 PMC: 11810484. DOI: 10.1111/jan.16332.


Patients' pathways to the emergency department: a scoping review.

Nummedal M, King S, Uleberg O, Pedersen S, Bjornsen L Int J Emerg Med. 2024; 17(1):61.

PMID: 38698343 PMC: 11067175. DOI: 10.1186/s12245-024-00638-w.


Emergency physician personnel crisis: a survey on attitudes of new generations in Slovenia.

Petravic L, Bajec B, Burger E, Tiefengraber E, Slavec A, Strnad M BMC Emerg Med. 2024; 24(1):25.

PMID: 38355454 PMC: 10865631. DOI: 10.1186/s12873-024-00940-z.


Identifying performance indicators to measure overall performance of telephone triage - a scoping review.

Vainio H, Soininen L, Castren M, Torkki P Scand J Prim Health Care. 2023; 42(1):38-50.

PMID: 38078730 PMC: 10851803. DOI: 10.1080/02813432.2023.2283188.


Disposition of emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism after ambulance arrival.

Rouleau S, Campbell A, Huang J, Reed M, Vinson D J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2023; 4(6):e13068.

PMID: 38029020 PMC: 10667606. DOI: 10.1002/emp2.13068.


References
1.
Redstone P, Vancura J, Barry D, Kutner J . Nonurgent use of the emergency department. J Ambul Care Manage. 2008; 31(4):370-6. DOI: 10.1097/01.JAC.0000336555.54460.fe. View

2.
Norberg G, Wireklint Sundstrom B, Christensson L, Nystrom M, Herlitz J . Swedish emergency medical services' identification of potential candidates for primary healthcare: Retrospective patient record study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2015; 33(4):311-7. PMC: 4750742. DOI: 10.3109/02813432.2015.1114347. View

3.
Teasdale G, Jennett B . Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet. 1974; 2(7872):81-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(74)91639-0. View

4.
Anselmi L, Meacock R, Kristensen S, Doran T, Sutton M . Arrival by ambulance explains variation in mortality by time of admission: retrospective study of admissions to hospital following emergency department attendance in England. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016; 26(8):613-621. PMC: 5537532. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005680. View

5.
Bezzina A, Smith P, Cromwell D, Eagar K . Primary care patients in the emergency department: who are they? A review of the definition of the 'primary care patient' in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2005; 17(5-6):472-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2005.00779.x. View