The role of full capacity protocols on mitigating overcrowding in EDs.

OBJECTIVE Overcrowding is an important issue facing many emergency departments (EDs). Access block (admitted patients occupying ED stretchers) is a leading contributor, and expeditious placement of admitted patients is an area of research interest. This review examined the effectiveness of full capacity protocols (FCPs) on mitigating ED overcrowding. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was undertaken to identify potentially relevant studies between 1966 and 2009. Intervention studies in which an FCP was used to influence ED/hospital length of stay and ED/hospital access block were included as a single program or part of a systemwide intervention. Two reviewers independently assessed citation relevance, inclusion, study quality, and extracted data; because of limited data, pooling was not undertaken. RESULTS From 14 446 potentially relevant studies, 2 abstracts from the same comparative study were included. From 29 studies on systemwide intervention, 4 contained an FCP component. The included study was a single-center ED study using a before-after design; its methodological quality was rated as weak. One of the abstracts reported that an FCP was associated with less ED length of stay (5-hour reduction) when compared with the comparison period; the other reported that an FCP decreased ED and hospital access block (28% and 37% reduction, respectively). The ED triggers, format, and implementation of FCP protocols varied widely. CONCLUSION Although FCPs may be a promising alternative for overcrowded EDs, the available evidence upon which to support implementation of an FCP is limited. Additional efforts are required to improve the outcome reporting of FCP research using high-quality research methods.

[1]  Michael J. Schull,et al.  Frequency, determinants and impact of overcrowding in emergency departments in Canada: a national survey. , 2007 .

[2]  J. Collet,et al.  Intervention to decrease emergency department crowding: does it have an effect on return visits and hospital readmissions? , 2003, Annals of emergency medicine.

[3]  F. Song,et al.  Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. , 2003, Health technology assessment.

[4]  K. Kelly,et al.  Publication bias of randomized controlled trials in emergency medicine. , 2006, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[5]  Asa Viccellio,et al.  The association between transfer of emergency department boarders to inpatient hallways and mortality: a 4-year experience. , 2009, Annals of emergency medicine.

[6]  D. Aronsky,et al.  Systematic review of emergency department crowding: causes, effects, and solutions. , 2008, Annals of emergency medicine.

[7]  A R Jadad,et al.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? , 1996, Controlled clinical trials.

[8]  G. D’Onofrio,et al.  286: Use of Lean Techniques to Simplify Admission Procedures and Decrease ED Process Time , 2007 .

[9]  B. H. Thomas,et al.  A process for systematically reviewing the literature: providing the research evidence for public health nursing interventions. , 2004, Worldviews on evidence-based nursing.

[10]  W. Baxt,et al.  Emergency department patient preferences for boarding locations when hospitals are at full capacity. , 2008, Annals of emergency medicine.

[11]  Karin V Rhodes,et al.  A conceptual model of emergency department crowding. , 2003, Annals of emergency medicine.

[12]  G. Innes,et al.  Impact of an Overcapacity Care Protocol on Emergency Department Overcrowding , 2007 .