Seventy-two-hour returns may not be a good indicator of safety in the emergency department: a national study.

OBJECTIVES The objective was to measure the association between returns to an emergency department (ED) within 72 hours and resource utilization, severity of illness, mortality, and admission rate. METHODS This was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of ED visits using data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) from 1998 to 2006. Cohorts were patients who had been seen in the ED within the past 72 hours versus those without the prior visit. A multivariate model was created to predict adjusted-resource utilization and mortality or admission rate. RESULTS During the study period, there were 218,179 ED patient visits and a 3.2% 72-hour return rate. Patients with Medicare (3.5%) and without insurance (3.5%) were more likely to return within 72 hours. Visits associated with alcohol (4.1%), low triage acuity (4.0%), or dermatologic conditions (5.9%) were more likely to return. Seventy-two-hour return visits used fewer resources (5.0 [±0.1] vs. 5.5 [±0.1] tests, medications, procedures), were less likely to be Level I triage acuity (17% vs. 20%), and had a similar admission rate (13% vs. 13%) as those not seen within 72 hours. The sample size was too small to evaluate mortality. CONCLUSIONS Patients who return to the ED within 72 hours do not use more resources, are not more severely ill, and do not have a higher hospital admission rate than those who had not been previously seen. These findings do not support the use of 72-hour returns as a quality or safety indicator. A more refined variation such as 72-hour returns resulting in admission may have more value.

[1]  S. Hu,et al.  Analysis of patient revisits to the emergency department. , 1992, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[2]  A. Kellerman,et al.  "Bounces": an analysis of short-term return visits to a public hospital emergency department. , 1990, Annals of emergency medicine.

[3]  Christian Martin-Gill,et al.  Risk factors for 72-hour admission to the ED. , 2004, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[4]  L. McCaig,et al.  Plan and operation of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Survey. Series 1: programs and collection procedures. , 1994, Vital and health statistics. Ser. 1, Programs and collection procedures.

[5]  M. Kobernick,et al.  Return visits to the emergency department. , 1987, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[6]  StataCorp Stata survey data reference manual , 2011 .

[7]  A. Aguirre-Jaíme,et al.  Unscheduled returns to the emergency department: an outcome of medical errors? , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[8]  J. Gordon,et al.  Initial emergency department diagnosis and return visits: risk versus perception. , 1998, Annals of emergency medicine.

[9]  Michael Schull,et al.  The development of indicators to measure the quality of clinical care in emergency departments following a modified-delphi approach. , 2002, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[10]  M. Kobernick,et al.  Emergency department revisits. , 1989, Annals of emergency medicine.

[11]  S. Schenkel Promoting patient safety and preventing medical error in emergency departments. , 2000, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[12]  Shih-Chiang Hung,et al.  Unplanned Emergency Department Revisits within 72 Hours , 2004 .

[13]  Chen-Hsen Lee,et al.  Risk factors and prognostic predictors of unexpected intensive care unit admission within 3 days after ED discharge. , 2007, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[14]  J. Chamberlain,et al.  Analysis of pediatric hospitalizations after emergency department release as a quality improvement tool. , 2002, Annals of emergency medicine.

[15]  R. Feise Do multiple outcome measures require p-value adjustment? , 2002, BMC medical research methodology.