Characterizing the vulnerability of frequent emergency department users by applying a conceptual framework: a controlled, cross-sectional study

Patrick Bodenmann, Stéphanie Baggio, Katia Iglesias, Fabrice Althaus, Venetia-Sofia Velonaki, Stephanie Stucki, Corine Ansermet, Sophie Paroz, Lionel Trueb, Olivier Hugli, Judith L Griffin, Jean-Bernard Daeppen, Patrick Bodenmann, Stéphanie Baggio, Katia Iglesias, Fabrice Althaus, Venetia-Sofia Velonaki, Stephanie Stucki, Corine Ansermet, Sophie Paroz, Lionel Trueb, Olivier Hugli, Judith L Griffin, Jean-Bernard Daeppen

Abstract

Background: Frequent emergency department (ED) users meet several of the criteria of vulnerability, but this needs to be further examined taking into consideration all vulnerability's different dimensions. This study aimed to characterize frequent ED users and to define risk factors of frequent ED use within a universal health care coverage system, applying a conceptual framework of vulnerability.

Methods: A controlled, cross-sectional study comparing frequent ED users to a control group of non-frequent users was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Frequent users were defined as patients with five or more visits to the ED in the previous 12 months. The two groups were compared using validated scales for each one of the five dimensions of an innovative conceptual framework: socio-demographic characteristics; somatic, mental, and risk-behavior indicators; and use of health care services. Independent t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Pearson's Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were used for the comparison. To examine the -related to vulnerability- risk factors for being a frequent ED user, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used.

Results: We compared 226 frequent users and 173 controls. Frequent users had more vulnerabilities in all five dimensions of the conceptual framework. They were younger, and more often immigrants from low/middle-income countries or unemployed, had more somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, were more often tobacco users, and had more primary care physician (PCP) visits. The most significant frequent ED use risk factors were a history of more than three hospital admissions in the previous 12 months (adj OR:23.2, 95%CI = 9.1-59.2), the absence of a PCP (adj OR:8.4, 95%CI = 2.1-32.7), living less than 5 km from an ED (adj OR:4.4, 95%CI = 2.1-9.0), and household income lower than USD 2,800/month (adj OR:4.3, 95%CI = 2.0-9.2).

Conclusions: Frequent ED users within a universal health coverage system form a highly vulnerable population, when taking into account all five dimensions of a conceptual framework of vulnerability. The predictive factors identified could be useful in the early detection of future frequent users, in order to address their specific needs and decrease vulnerability, a key priority for health care policy makers. Application of the conceptual framework in future research is warranted.

References

    1. LaCalle E, Rabin E. Frequent users of emergency departments: the myths, the data, and the policy implications. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;56(1):42–8. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.01.032.
    1. Bieler G, Paroz S, Faouzi M, Trueb L, Vaucher P, Althaus F, et al. Social and medical vulnerability factors of emergency department frequent users in a universal health insurance system. Acad Emerg Med. 2012;19(1):63–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01246.x.
    1. Lucas RH, Sanford SM. An analysis of frequent users of emergency care at an urban university hospital. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;32(5):563–8. doi: 10.1016/S0196-0644(98)70033-2.
    1. Byrne M, Murphy AW, Plunkett PK, McGee HM, Murray A, Bury G. Frequent attenders to an emergency department: a study of primary health care use, medical profile, and psychosocial characteristics. Ann Emerg Med. 2003;41(3):309–18. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.68.
    1. Pines JM, Asplin BR, Kaji AH, Lowe RA, Magid DJ, Raven M, et al. Frequent users of emergency department services: gaps in knowledge and a proposed research agenda. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(6):e64–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01086.x.
    1. Hurst SA. Vulnerability in research and health care; describing the elephant in the room? Bioethics. 2008;22(4):191–202. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00631.x.
    1. World Health Organization . Constitution. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1948.
    1. Aday L. At risk in America. San francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2001.
    1. Althaus F, Stucki S, Guyot S, Trueb L, Moschetti K, Daeppen J-B, et al. Characteristics of highly frequent users of a Swiss academic emergency department: a retrospective consecutive case series. Eur J Emerg Med. 2013;20(6):413–9. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32835e078e.
    1. Canepa Allen MC, Ansermet C, Schüpbach J, Vu F, Bouche L, Ninane F, et al. Respectful nursing support of patient priorities. Krankenpfl Soins Infirm. 2014;107(6):62–5.
    1. Sun BC, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Predictors and outcomes of frequent emergency department users. Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10(4):320–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb01344.x.
    1. Hansagi H, Olsson M, Sjoberg S, Tomson Y, Goransson S. Frequent use of the hospital emergency department is indicative of high use of other health care services. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;37(6):561–7. doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.111762.
    1. Fuda KK, Immekus R. Frequent users of Massachusetts emergency departments: a statewide analysis. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48(1):9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.03.001.
    1. Moe J, Bailey AL, Oland R, Levesque L, Murray H. Defining, quantifying, and characterizing adult frequent users of a suburban Canadian emergency department. CJEM. 2013;15(0):1–13.
    1. Ruger JP, Richter CJ, Spitznagel EL, Lewis LM. Analysis of costs, length of stay, and utilization of emergency department services by frequent users: implications for health policy. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11(12):1311–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2004.tb01919.x.
    1. Jelinek GA, Jiwa M, Gibson NP, Lynch AM. Frequent attenders at emergency departments: A linked-data population study of adult patients. Med J Aus. 2008;189(10):552–6.
    1. Peddie S, Richardson S, Salt L, Ardagh M. Frequent attenders at emergency departments: research regarding the utility of management plans fails to take into account the natural attrition of attendance. N Z Med J. 2011;124(1331):61–6.
    1. Paul P, Heng BH, Seow E, Molina J, Tay SY. Predictors of frequent attenders of emergency department at an acute general hospital in Singapore. Emerg Med J. 2010;27(11):843–8. doi: 10.1136/emj.2009.079160.
    1. Sandoval E, Smith S, Walter J, Schuman S-AH, Olson MP, Striefler R, et al. A comparison of frequent and infrequent visitors to an urban emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2010;38(2):115–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.09.042.
    1. Liu SW, Nagurney JT, Chang Y, Parry BA, Smulowitz P, Atlas SJ. Frequent ED users: are most visits for mental health, alcohol, and drug-related complaints? Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31(10):1512–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2013.08.006.
    1. OECD/WHO . OECD Reviews of Health Systems: Switzerland 2011. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2011.
    1. Leu RE, Rutten FFH, Brouwer W, Matter P, Rütschi C. The swiss and dutch health insurance systems: Universal coverage and regulated competitive insurance markets. Commonwealth Fund pub. no. 1220. Website of the Commonwealth Fund. 2009 Available at: . Accessed: 19 May 2015
    1. Reinhardt UE. The Swiss health system: regulated competition without managed care. JAMA. 2004;292(10):1227–31. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.10.1227.
    1. Wolff H, Gaspoz J-M, Guessous I. Health care renunciation for economic reasons in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly. 2011
    1. TARMED Suisse. TARMED Version tarifaire 1.08.0000. 2012. . Accessed: 12 Jun 2015.
    1. Guessous I, Gaspoz JM, Theler JM, Wolff H. High prevalence of forgoing healthcare for economic reasons in Switzerland: A population-based study in a region with universal health insurance coverage. Prev Med. 2012;55(5):521–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.08.005.
    1. Bodenmann P, Favrat B, Wolff H, Guessous I, Panese F, Herzig L, et al. Screening primary-care patients forgoing health care for economic reasons. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(4):e94006. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094006.
    1. Moreno-Serra R, Smith PC. Does progress towards universal health coverage improve population health? Lancet. 2012;380(9845):917–23. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61039-3.
    1. Collet T-H, Salamin S, Zimmerli L, Kerr EA, Clair C, Picard-Kossovsky M, et al. The quality of primary care in a country with universal health care coverage. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(7):724–30. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1674-0.
    1. Nadeem E. Lessons from Abroad. A series on health care reform. Health care lessons from Switzerland. Fraser Institute; 2013. . Accessed 19 May 2015.
    1. Mosialos E., Wenzl M., Osborn R., Anderson C. International profiles of health care systems, 2014 - Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. The Commonwealth Fund pub no 1802. 2015 Available at: . Accessed: 19 May 2015
    1. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4(10):e296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040296.
    1. Feldhaus KM, Koziol-McLain J, Amsbury HL, Norton IM, Lowenstein SR, Abbott JT. Accuracy of 3 brief screening questions for detecting partner violence in the emergency department. JAMA. 1997;277(17):1357–61. doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540410035027.
    1. Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32(6):705–14. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90150-B.
    1. Singh-Manoux A, Adler NE, Marmot MG. Subjective social status: its determinants and its association with measures of ill-health in the Whitehall II study. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(6):1321–33. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00131-4.
    1. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373–83. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8.
    1. Katz JN, Chang LC, Sangha O, Fossel AH, Bates DW. Can comorbidity be measured by questionnaire rather than medical record review? Med Care. 1996;34(1):73–84. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199601000-00006.
    1. Ware J, Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
    1. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire. JAMA. 1999;282(18):1737–44. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.18.1737.
    1. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, et al. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;20(59 Suppl):22–33.
    1. WHO ASSIST Working Group The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST): development, reliability and feasibility. Addiction. 2002;97(9):1183–94. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00185.x.
    1. Humeniuk R, Ali R, Babor TF, Farrell M, Formigoni ML, Jittiwutikarn J, et al. Validation of the Alcohol, Smoking And Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) Addiction. 2008;103(6):1039–47. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02114.x.
    1. Chaiton MO, Cohen JE, McDonald PW, Bondy SJ. The Heaviness of Smoking Index as a predictor of smoking cessation in Canada. Addict Behav. 2007;32(5):1031–42. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.07.008.
    1. Dubois-Arber F, Meystre-Agustoni G, André J, De Heller K, Alain P, Bodenmann P. Sexual behaviour of men that consulted in medical outpatient clinics in Western Switzerland from 2005–2006: risk levels unknown to doctors? BMC Public Health. 2010;10:528. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-528.
    1. Collett D. Modelling binary data. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2003.
    1. Kaiser Family Foundation. Characteristics of Frequent Emergency Department Users. 2007. . Accessed: 02 Feb 2015.
    1. Ondler C, Hegde GG, Carlson JN. Resource utilization and health care charges associated with the most frequent ED users. Am J Emerg Med. 2014
    1. Swiss Confederation (2014) Population étrangère: nationalité. Office fédéral de la statistique. 2014. Accessed: 28 Oct 2014.
    1. Hunt KA, Weber EJ, Showstack JA, Colby DC, Callaham ML. Characteristics of frequent users of emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48(1):1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.12.030.
    1. Williams ER, Guthrie E, Mackway-Jones K, James M, Tomenson B, Eastham J, et al. Psychiatric status, somatisation, and health care utilization of frequent attenders at the emergency department: a comparison with routine attenders. J Psychosom Res. 2001;50(3):161–7. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3999(00)00228-2.
    1. Hagon-Traub I, Schaller P, Philippe J, Ruiz J. Maladies chroniques : le politique doit s’engager! Chronic diseases: the politician must engage himself. Rev Med Suisse. 2013;9(389):1179–80.
    1. Graves JA, Swartz K. Health Care Reform and the Dynamics of Insurance Coverage - Lessons from Massachusetts. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(13):1181–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1207217.
    1. Schoen C, Osborn R, Squires D, Doty MM, Pierson R, Applebaum S. How health insurance design affects access to care and costs, by income, in eleven countries. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010;29(12):2323–34. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0862.
    1. Bautista E, Chotpitayasunondh T, Gao Z, Harper SA, Shaw M, Uyeki TM, et al. Clinical aspects of pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus infection. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(18):1708–19. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1000449.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir