Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28559030›Full record

ArticleAnnals of emergency medicine2017

The Effect of Utilization Review on Emergency Department Operations.

Shoma Desai, Phillip F Gruber, Erick Eiting, Seth A Seabury, Wendy J Mack, Christian Voyageur, Veronica Vasquez, Hyung T Kim, Sophie Terp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of emergency medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The role of information systems in emergency department decision-making-a literature review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Shoma DesaiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. Electronic address: sdesai@dhs.lacounty.gov.
Phillip F GruberDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Erick EitingDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Seth A SeaburyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA; Keck School of Medicine, and the Leonard D Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Wendy J MackDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Christian VoyageurLos Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
Veronica VasquezDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Hyung T KimDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Sophie TerpDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA; Keck School of Medicine, and the Leonard D Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

Funding

Southern California Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000130 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BUCHANAN, THOMAS A · 2012 to 2015
$36.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

objectiveIncreasingly, hospitals are using utilization review software to reduce hospital admissions in an effort to contain costs. Such practices have the potential to increase the number of unsafe discharges, particularly in public safety-net hospitals. Utilization review software tools are not well studied with regard to their effect on emergency department (ED) operations. We study the effect of prospectively used admission decision support on ED operations.

methodsIn 2012, Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center implemented prospective use of computerized admission criteria. After implementation, only ED patients meeting primary review (diagnosis-based criteria) or secondary review (medical necessity as determined by an on-site emergency physician) were assigned inpatient beds. Data were extracted from electronic medical records from September 2011 through December 2013. Outcomes included operational metrics, 30-day ED revisits, and 30-day admission rates. Excluding a 6-month implementation period, monthly summary metrics were compared pre- and postimplementation with nonparametric and negative binomial regression methods. All adult ED visits, excluding incarcerated and purely behavioral health visits, were analyzed. The primary outcomes were disposition rates. Secondary outcomes were 30-day ED revisits, 30-day admission rate among return visitors to the ED, and estimated cost.

resultsAnalysis of 245,662 ED encounters was performed. The inpatient admission rate decreased from 14.2% to 12.8%. Increases in discharge rate (82.4% to 83.4%) and ED observation unit utilization (2.5% to 3.4%) were found. Thirty-day revisits increased (20.4% to 24.4%), although the 30-day admission rate decreased (3.2% to 2.8%). Estimated cost savings totaled $193.17 per ED visit.

conclusionThe prospective application of utilization review software in the ED led to a decrease in the admission rate. This was tempered by a concomitant increase in ED observation unit utilization and 30-day ED revisits. Cost savings suggest that resources should be redirected to the more highly affected ED and ED observation unit, although more work is needed to confirm the generalizability of these findings.

Indexed as

AdultDecision Support TechniquesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHospitalizationHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisLos AngelesMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient DischargePatient ReadmissionPatient SafetyProspective StudiesRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID28559030
PMCPMC13225766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.