Observational studyDer Anaesthesist2013
[Validity of admission diagnoses as process-driving criteria : influence on length of stay and consultation rate in emergency departments].
Observational study in Der Anaesthesist, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hospital Emergency Departments—Utilization and Resource Deployment in the Hospital as a Function of the Type of ReferralDeutsches Arzteblatt international · 2022Article
- Article
- [Routine Data from Emergency Departments: Varying Documentation Standards, Billing Modalities and Data Custodians at an Identical Unit of Care].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2020Article
- [Training in clinical acute and emergency medicine - Supraspeciality in Germany : A concept for nationwide implementation!]Der Anaesthesist · 2018Review
- [Future of emergency medicine in Germany 2.0].Der Anaesthesist · 2017Review
- Parameters affecting length of stay in a pediatric emergency department: a retrospective observational study.European journal of pediatrics · 2017Observational
- [Management of critically ill patients in the resuscitation room. Different than for trauma?].Der Anaesthesist · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care physicians and specialists often refer patients to the emergency department with a specific diagnosis and request for admission. Such an external diagnosis frequently influences the initial evaluation in the emergency department. The present study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of such external diagnoses and to assess the consequences of incorrect diagnoses on length of stay and number of specialty consultations in the emergency department. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis was a prospective observational study over the course of 3 months in the emergency department of a tertiary care center. External admission diagnoses made by primary care physicians and specialists were categorized as "accurate", "partially accurate" and "inaccurate". A special analysis of the external admission diagnosed was performed for patients admitted directly to an intermediary care unit and intensive care unit or patients who were transferred directly from the emergency department to the operating room.
resultsData for 784 patients were analyzed. Patients were on average 63.1 ± 19.5 years old (minimum-maximum 18-97 years, median 68 years) and 54 % were male. After emergency department evaluation and treatment 57.8 % of external diagnoses were categorized as accurate, 23.6 % as partially accurate and 18.6 % as inaccurate. Patients with partially accurate and inaccurate diagnoses had a 3 and 6.5 times higher rate of specialty consultations in the emergency department, respectively, when compared with patients with an accurate diagnosis (number of specialty consultations n = 0: 77.3 % vs. 54.1 % vs. 92.9 %, p < 0.05; n = 1: 20.0 % vs. 40.4 % vs. 6.2 %, p < 0.05; n = 2: 2.7 % vs. 5.5 % vs. 0.9 %, p < 0.05, respectively. Patients with an accurate diagnosis had a shorter total length of stay than patients with a partially accurate or inaccurate diagnosis [mean ± SD (min-max; median): 192 ± 108 min (10-707 min; 181 min) vs. 246 ± 126 min (27-1,026 min; 214 min) vs. 258 ± 138 min (22-700 min; 232 min), p < 0.001], respectively. Out of 85 patients admitted directly to an intermediary care unit, intensive care unit and patients who were transferred directly from the emergency department to the operating room the diagnosis was accurate, partially accurate and inaccurate in 56.5 %, 24.7 % and 18.8 %, respectively.
conclusionsAdmission diagnoses made by primary care physicians and specialists who subsequently refer patients to the emergency department are subject to certain inaccuracies. Inaccurate admission diagnoses are associated with an increased length of stay and a considerably higher rate of specialty consultation in the emergency department. Standardized operating procedures, treatment algorithms and triage systems are important to identify such incorrect diagnoses so that these patients can undergo appropriate diagnostic investigation and treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23917893What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.