scholarly journals Justification for Collecting Urgent Care Data to Broaden Syndromic Surveillance

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David J Swenson ◽  
Em Stephens ◽  
Samuel P Prahlow ◽  
Adejare Atanda
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance ◽  
The United States ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Relative Standard ◽  
Ambulatory Medical Care

Objective: Provide justification for the collection and reporting of urgent care (UC) data for public health syndromic surveillance.Introduction: While UC does not have a standard definition, it can generally be described as the delivery of ambulatory medical care outside of a hospital emergency department (ED) on a walk-in basis, without a scheduled appointment, available at extended hours, and providing an array of services comparable to typical primary care offices.1 UC facilities represent a growing sector of the United States healthcare industry, doubling in size between 2008 and 2011.1 The Urgent Care Association of America (UCAOA) estimates that UC facilities had 160 million patient encounters in 2013.2 This compares to 130.4 million patient encounters in EDs in 2013, as reported by the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.3 Public Health (PH) is actively working to broaden syndromic surveillance to include urgent care data as more individuals use these services.4 PH needs justification when reaching out to healthcare partners to get buy-in for collecting and reporting UC data.Description: The International Society for Disease Surveillance (ISDS) Community of Practice (CoP) platform was used to host a webinar introducing the topic of urgent care participation in syndromic surveillance. This webinar provided a valuable opportunity to obtain insight from jurisdictions pursuing and using UC data. A workgroup was formed to create documentation justifying the collection and reporting of UC data. Using this forum, the workgroup brought together partners from various jurisdictions working with UC data to participate in a literature review of SCOPUS, PubMed, and the Online Journal of Public Health Informatics publications and to share their experiences. These two main sources of information – previous literature and jurisdictional experience – were combined and condensed to provide tangible justifications for the collection and use of UC data.While the workgroup found little in the literature to justify the collection of UC data as a part of syndromic surveillance, the shared experiences of the CoP jurisdictions working to onboard UC facilities provided valuable insight. From this collaborative response, three main reasons to collect UC data were identified.1) Healthcare reform is directing patients away from EDs and toward UC facilities. UC represents reduced cost and more efficient patient processing, thus easing the burden on both patient and healthcare system (according to a 2016 American Academy of Pediatrics article entitled “Urgent Care and Emergency Department Visits in the Pediatric Medicaid Population”). If syndromic surveillance does not adapt to include UC data, the potential exists to lose significant patient populations, which may lead to decreased situational awareness.2) According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Stage 3 guidance, Meaningful Use (MU) will change the relationship between eligible professionals (EPs) and syndromic surveillance by restricting EPs to those who practice in a UC facility. This approach to EP participation simplifies the syndromic surveillance MU objective, thereby making it easier for PH jurisdictions to onboard UC facilities.3) Patients with certain conditions that are acute but non-emergent may report more frequently to an UC facility than to an ED. Broadening syndromic surveillance to include UC facilities may increase reporting of “rare event” encounters, which will lower the relative standard error for statistical calculation. Surveillance efforts for conditions like influenza-like illness and Zika virus may improve substantially with a larger data pool.How the Moderator Intends to Engage the Audience in Discussions on the Topic: The moderator will begin discussion with a brief presentation from the literature review and jurisdictional experience, highlighting three justifications for collecting and reporting UC data. The audience will be divided into 3 groups to discuss and validate 3 additional topics: creation of syndromic surveillance talking points to share with UC facility management, creation of jurisdictional UC facility listings, and UC onboarding best practices. Feedback from the 3 groups will be shared with the whole group, followed by a brief summary of the discussion and recommendations for next steps.

scholarly journals 1099. Antibiotic Prescriptions for Acute Gastroenteritis during Office and Emergency Department Visits–United States, 2006–2015

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S330-S330
Author(s):  
Jennifer P Collins ◽  
Louise Francois Watkins ◽  
Laura M King ◽  
Monina Bartoces ◽  
Katherine Fleming-Dutra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Acute Gastroenteritis ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
The United States ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Care Survey ◽  
Ambulatory Medical Care

Abstract Background Acute gastroenteritis (AGE) is a major cause of office and emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. Most patients can be managed with supportive care alone, although some require antibiotics. Limiting unnecessary antibiotic use can minimize side effects and the development of resistance. We used national data to assess antibiotic prescribing for AGE to target areas for stewardship efforts. Methods We used the 2006–2015 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey of EDs and National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey to describe antibiotic prescribing for AGE. An AGE visit was defined as one with a new problem (<3 months) as the main visit indication and an ICD-9 code for bacterial or viral gastrointestinal infection or AGE symptoms (nausea, vomiting, and/or diarrhea). We excluded visits with ICD-9 codes for Clostridium difficile or an infection usually requiring antibiotics (e.g., pneumonia). We calculated national annual percentage estimates based on weights of sampled visits and used an α level of 0.01, recommended for these data. Results Of the 12,191 sampled AGE visits, 13% (99% CI: 11–15%) resulted in antibiotic prescriptions, equating to an estimated 1.3 million AGE visits with antibiotic prescriptions annually. Antibiotics were more likely to be prescribed in office AGE visits (16%, 99% CI: 12–20%) compared with ED AGE visits (11%, 99% CI: 9–12%; P < 0.01). Among AGE visits with antibiotic prescriptions, the most frequently prescribed were fluoroquinolones (29%, 99% CI: 21–36%), metronidazole (18%, 99% CI: 13–24%), and penicillins (18%, 99% CI: 11–24%). Antibiotics were prescribed for 25% (99% CI: 8–42%) of visits for bacterial AGE, 16% (99% CI: 12–21%) for diarrhea without nausea or vomiting, and 11% (99% CI: 8–15%) for nausea, vomiting, or both without diarrhea. Among AGE visits with fever (T ≥ 100.9oF) at the visit, 21% (99% CI: 11–31%) resulted in antibiotic prescriptions. Conclusion Patients treated for AGE in office settings were significantly more likely to receive prescriptions for antibiotics compared with those seen in an ED, despite likely lower acuity. Antibiotic prescribing was also high for visits for nausea or vomiting, conditions that usually do not require antibiotics. Antimicrobial stewardship for AGE is needed, especially in office settings. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals Use of Emergency Department Data to Monitor and Respond to an Increase in Opioid Overdoses in New Hampshire, 2011-2015

2017 ◽  
Vol 132 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 73S-79S ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth R. Daly ◽  
Kenneth Dufault ◽  
David J. Swenson ◽  
Paul Lakevicius ◽  
Erin Metcalf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance ◽  
Situational Awareness ◽  
The United States ◽  
Chief Complaint ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance System ◽  
Icd Codes

Objectives: Opioid-related overdoses and deaths in New Hampshire have increased substantially in recent years, similar to increases observed across the United States. We queried emergency department (ED) data in New Hampshire to monitor opioid-related ED encounters as part of the public health response to this health problem. Methods: We obtained data on opioid-related ED encounters for the period January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015, from New Hampshire’s syndromic surveillance ED data system by querying for (1) chief complaint text related to the words “fentanyl,” “heroin,” “opiate,” and “opioid” and (2) opioid-related International Classification of Diseases ( ICD) codes. We then analyzed the data to calculate frequencies of opioid-related ED encounters by age, sex, residence, chief complaint text values, and ICD codes. Results: Opioid-related ED encounters increased by 70% during the study period, from 3300 in 2011 to 5603 in 2015; the largest increases occurred in adults aged 18-29 and in males. Of 20 994 total opioid-related ED visits, we identified 18 554 (88%) using ICD code alone, 690 (3%) using chief complaint text alone, and 1750 (8%) using both chief complaint text and ICD code. For those encounters identified by ICD code only, the corresponding chief complaint text included varied and nonspecific words, with the most common being “pain” (n = 3335, 18%), “overdose” (n = 1555, 8%), “suicidal” (n = 816, 4%), “drug” (n = 803, 4%), and “detox” (n = 750, 4%). Heroin-specific encounters increased by 827%, from 4% of opioid-related encounters in 2011 to 24% of encounters in 2015. Conclusions: Opioid-related ED encounters in New Hampshire increased substantially from 2011 to 2015. Data from New Hampshire’s ED syndromic surveillance system provided timely situational awareness to public health partners to support the overall response to the opioid epidemic.

scholarly journals Monitoring Sexual Violence Trends in Emergency Department Visits Using Syndromic Data From the National Syndromic Surveillance Program—United States, January 2017–December 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 485-493
Author(s):  
Ashley Schappell D'Inverno ◽  
Nimi Idaikkadar ◽  
Debra Houry
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Sexual Violence ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Surveillance Program ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Ed Visits

Objectives. To report trends in sexual violence (SV) emergency department (ED) visits in the United States. Methods. We analyzed monthly changes in SV rates (per 100 000 ED visits) from January 2017 to December 2019 using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Syndromic Surveillance Program data. We stratified the data by sex and age groups. Results. There were 196 948 SV-related ED visits from January 2017 to December 2019. Females had higher rates of SV-related ED visits than males. Across the entire time period, females aged 50 to 59 years showed the highest increase (57.33%) in SV-related ED visits, when stratified by sex and age group. In all strata examined, SV-related ED visits displayed positive trends from January 2017 to December 2019; 10 out of the 24 observed positive trends were statistically significant increases. We also observed seasonal trends with spikes in SV-related ED visits during warmer months and declines during colder months, particularly in ages 0 to 9 years and 10 to 19 years. Conclusions. We identified several significant increases in SV-related ED visits from January 2017 to December 2019. Syndromic surveillance offers near-real-time surveillance of ED visits and can aid in the prevention of SV.

scholarly journals Emergency department visits by patients with venous thromboembolism, 1998-2009

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussain Yusuf ◽  
James Tsai ◽  
Azfar-E-Alam Siddiqi ◽  
Sheree Boulet ◽  
J. Michael Soucie
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
The United States ◽  
Primary Diagnosis ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Care Survey ◽  
Outpatient Settings ◽  
Ambulatory Medical Care

Background: Substantial morbidity and mortality may result from venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Many VTE cases are diagnosed in outpatient settings, such as emergency departments. The purpose of this study was to estimate and characterize emergency department visits by patients with a primary diagnosis of VTE. Methods: Data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) for the years 1998-2009 were analyzed.  NHAMCS uses a complex multistage design to sample non-federal short-term care hospitals across the United States.  Emergency department visits with a primary diagnosis of VTE were identified using ICD-9-CM codes indicating a primary diagnosis of DVT or PE. Results: Between 2006-2009, an annual average of 201,000 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 152,000-251,000) emergency department visits were made in the U.S. by patients with a primary diagnosis of VTE as per the criteria used in this study, which was a rate of approximately 67 (95% CI 50-83) per 100,000 population.  The rates during 1998-2001 and 2002-2005 were 31 (95% CI 21-40) and 46 (95% CI 35-57), respectively. The rate of visits with a primary diagnosis of VTE was higher among patients >61 years of age, when compared to younger patients.  Among visits between 1998-2009, selected characteristics that differed between visits by patents with  and without a primary diagnosis of VTE included the patient having been discharged from a hospital in the past seven days (11.7%, vs. 2.1%, p<0.01). Conclusion: A substantial number of emergency department visits are made by patients with a primary diagnosis of VTE. Groups with higher likelihood of VTE related visits may include older adults and those recently discharged from a hospital.

Current management of migraine in US emergency departments: An analysis of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey

Cephalalgia ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin W Friedman ◽  
Jason West ◽  
David R Vinson ◽  
Mia T Minen ◽  
Andrew Restivo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
National Hospital ◽  
Frequency Of Use ◽  
Care Survey ◽  
Ambulatory Medical Care

Background Published data from 1998 revealed that most patients treated for migraine in an emergency department received opioids. Over the intervening years, a large body of evidence has emerged demonstrating the efficacy and safety of non-opioid alternatives. Expert opinion during these years has cautioned against use of opioids for migraine. Our objectives were to compare current frequency of use of various medications for acute migraine in US emergency departments with use of these same medications in 1998 and to identify factors independently associated with opioid use. Methods We analyzed National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data from 2010, the most current dataset available. The National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey is a public dataset collected and distributed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It is a multi-stage probability sample from randomly selected emergency departments across the country, designed to be representative of all US emergency department visits. We included in our analysis all patients with the ICD9 emergency department discharge diagnosis of migraine. We tabulated frequency of use of specific medications in 2010 and compared these results with the 1998 data. Using a logistic regression model, into which all of the following variables were entered, we explored the independent association between any opioid use in 2010 and sex, age, race/ethnicity, geographic region, type of hospital, triage pain score and history of emergency department use within the previous 12 months. Results In 2010, there were 1.2 (95% confidence interval 0.9, 1.4) million migraine visits to US emergency departments. Including opioid-containing oral analgesic combinations, opioids were administered in 59% of visits (95% confidence interval 51, 67). The most commonly used parenteral agent, hydromorphone, was used in 25% (95% confidence interval 19, 33) of visits in 2010 versus less than 1% (95% confidence interval 0, 3) in 1998. Conversely, use of meperidine had decreased markedly over the same timeframe. In 2010, it was used in just 7% (95% confidence interval 4, 12) of visits compared to 37% (95% confidence interval 29, 45) in 1998. Metoclopramide, the most commonly used anti-dopaminergic, was administered in 17% (95% confidence interval 12, 23) of visits in 2010 and 3% (95% confidence interval 1, 6) of visits in 1998. Use of any triptan was relatively uncommon in 2010 (7% (95% confidence interval 4, 11) of visits) and in 1998 (10% (95% confidence interval 6, 15) of visits). Of the predictor variables listed above, only emergency department use within the previous 12 months was associated with opioid administration (adjusted odds ratio: 2.87 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 7.97)). Conclusions In spite of recommendations to the contrary, opioids are still used in more than half of all emergency department visits for migraine. Though use of meperidine has decreased markedly between 1998 and 2010, it has largely been replaced by hydromorphone. Opioid use in migraine visits is independently associated with prior visits to the same emergency department in the previous 12 months.

A solution to reducing avoidable emergency department visits: Implementation of an outpatient oncology acute care clinic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13517-e13517
Author(s):  
Sadaf Charania ◽  
Judy Devlin ◽  
Edie Brucker ◽  
Shayna Simon ◽  
Christine Hong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Urgent Care ◽  
Outpatient Basis ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Ed Visits

e13517 Background: Emergency Department (ED) utilization by oncology patients accounts for more than 4.5 million visits in the United States annually, leading to hospitalization four times the rate of the general population.1,2 Many ED visits are the result of symptoms related to cancer or cancer treatment that can be managed on an outpatient basis. Unnecessary admissions lead to possible delays in cancer treatment and increased burden on healthcare resources.3 Simmons Acute Care (SAC), an advanced practice provider (APP)-led clinic, was established in August 2020 to provide an alternative model of oncology care to address these issues. Methods: A multidisciplinary team of key stakeholders was formed to develop an action plan. Institutional data was reviewed to identify the timing and volume of ED visits by oncology patients. Clinic hours were set Monday through Friday, 7:00am – 7:00pm, and referrals were made from primary oncology providers. Evidence-based clinical pathways were developed to standardize patient management, and a data collection plan was implemented to measure outcomes. Internal communications to patients and presentations at staff and faculty meetings occurred to inform patients and clinical staff/providers. Results: From August to December 2020, 165 patient visits were completed in SAC, 141 patients discharged home, 14 patients directly admitted to the hospital, and 10 patients transferred to the ED for a higher level of care. Based on data from 2020, the average cost of an ED visit for an oncology patient was $5,500 and increased to $28,500 if the patient is admitted. Patients with hematologic and gastrointestinal malignancies represented approximately 30% of all visits. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the most frequent presenting chief complaint. Conclusions: Supporting oncology patients in the ambulatory setting provided a reduction in admissions and unnecessary ED visits, leading to cost savings/avoidance to the patient and health system. Based on internal cost analyses, there are potential savings of over $2 million to the organization during this 5-month period. Additional studies are underway to assess patient satisfaction, as well as the economic impact for patients. 1. Rui PKK. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2015 emergency department summary tables. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhamcs/web_tables/2015_ed_web_tables.pdf 2. Hong AS, Froehlich T, Clayton Hobbs S, Lee SJC, Halm EA. Impact of a Cancer Urgent Care Clinic on Regional Emergency Department Visits. J Oncol Pract. 2019;15(6):e501-e509. doi:10.1200/JOP.18.00743 3. Roy M, Halbert B, Devlin S, Chiu D, Graue R, Zerillo JA. From metrics to practice: identifying preventable emergency department visits for patients with cancer. Support Care Cancer Off J Multinatl Assoc Support Care Cancer. Published online November 7, 2020. doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05874-3

scholarly journals Increase in emergency department visits related to cannabis reported using syndromic surveillance system

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 621-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
G N Noel ◽  
A M Maghoo ◽  
F F Franke ◽  
G V Viudes ◽  
P M Minodier
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Surveillance System ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Syndromic Surveillance System ◽  
Icd 10

Abstract Background Cannabis is illegal in France but, as in many countries, legalization is under debate. In the United States, an increase of emergency department (ED) visits related to cannabis exposure (CE) in infants and adults was reported. In France, a retrospective observational study also suggested an increase of CE in children under 6 years old. This study only included toddlers and the data sources used did not allow repeated analysis for monitoring. Methods Our study aimed to evaluate the trend in visits for CE in ED in patients younger than 27 years old in Southern France. A cross-sectional study using the Electronic Emergency Department Abstracts (EEDA) included in the national Syndromic Surveillance System. CE visits were defined using International Classification of Disease (ICD-10). Results From 2009 to 2014, 16 EDs consistently reported EEDA with <5% missing diagnosis code. Seven hundred and ninety seven patients were admitted for CE including 49 (4.1%) children under 8 years old. From 2009–11 to 2012–14, the rate of CE visits increased significantly across all age groups. The highest increase was in the 8–14 years old (+144%; 1.85–4.51, P < 0.001) and was also significant in children under 8 (0.53–1.06; P = 0.02). Among children under 8, hospitalization rate (75.5% vs. 16.8%; P < 0.001) and intensive care unit admissions (4.1% vs. 0.1%; P < 0.001) were higher compared with patients older than 8 years. Conclusion These trends occurred despite cannabis remaining illegal. EEDA could be useful for monitoring CE in EDs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document