{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Evaluation of a Structured Review Process for Emergency Department Return Visits with Admission.
{Author}: Grabinski Z;Woo KM;Akindutire O;Dahn C;Nash L;Leybell I;Wang Y;Bayer D;Swartz J;Jamin C;Smith SW;
{Journal}: Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf
{Volume}: 50
{Issue}: 7
{Year}: 2024 Jul 15
暂无{DOI}: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2024.03.010
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: Review of emergency department (ED) revisits with admission allows the identification of improvement opportunities. Applying a health equity lens to revisits may highlight potential disparities in care transitions. Universal definitions or practicable frameworks for these assessments are lacking. The authors aimed to develop a structured methodology for this quality assurance (QA) process, with a layered equity analysis.
METHODS: The authors developed a classification instrument to identify potentially preventable 72-hour returns with admission (PPRA-72), accounting for directed, unrelated, unanticipated, or disease progression returns. A second review team assessed the instrument reliability. A self-reported race/ethnicity (R/E) and language algorithm was developed to minimize uncategorizable data. Disposition distribution, return rates, and PPRA-72 classifications were analyzed for disparities using Pearson chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.
RESULTS: The PPRA-72 rate was 4.8% for 2022 ED return visits requiring admission. Review teams achieved 93% agreement (κ = 0.51) for the binary determination of PPRA-72 vs. nonpreventable returns. There were significant differences between R/E and language in ED dispositions (p < 0.001), with more frequent admissions for the R/E White at the index visit and Other at the 72-hour return visit. Rates of return visits within 72 hours differed significantly by R/E (p < 0.001) but not by language (p = 0.156), with the R/E Black most frequent to have a 72-hour return. There were no differences between R/E (p = 0.446) or language (p = 0.248) in PPRA-72 rates. The initiative led to system improvements through informatics optimizations, triage protocols, provider feedback, and education.
CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed a review methodology for identifying improvement opportunities across ED 72-hour returns. This QA process enabled the identification of areas of disparity, with the continuous aim to develop next steps in ensuring health equity in care transitions.