PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Brent R Asplin

Publications and source records attributed to Brent R Asplin.

17 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Developing models for patient flow and daily surge capacity research.

Between 1993 and 2003, visits to U.S. emergency departments (EDs) increased by 26%, to a total of 114 million visits annually. At the same time, the number of U.S. EDs decreased by more than 400, and almost 200,000 inpatient hospital beds were taken out of service. In this context, the adequacy of daily surge capacity within the system is clearly an important issue. However, the research agenda on surge capacity thus far has focused primarily on large-scale disasters, such as pandemic influenza or a serious bioterrorism event. The concept of daily surge capacity and its relationship to the broader research agenda on patient flow is a relatively new area of investigation. In this article, the authors begin by describing the overlap between the research agendas on daily surge capacity and patient flow. Next, they propose two models that have potential applications for both daily surge capacity and hospitalwide patient-flow research. Finally, they identify potential research questions that are based on applications of the proposed research models.

Crowding↗
PubMed2006

Emergency department crowding: old problem, new solutions.

Emergency department (ED) crowding is becoming an increasing problem in EDs throughout the United States for a multitude of reasons, including an increase in patient volume and a decrease in available EDs. Crowding has an adverse impact on the ability to deliver quality and timely care and may contribute to adverse patient outcomes. Conceptually, factors that contribute to ED crowding can be divided into three domains, which correspond to their "sites of action": input, throughput, and output. A number of measures have been developed to better quantify crowding and its effects. More research needs to be done to better understand the factors that contribute to crowding, the impact of this problem on patients and ED throughput, and how to alleviate this nationwide crisis.

Crowding↗
PubMed2005

Insurance status and access to urgent ambulatory care follow-up appointments.

CONTEXT: There is growing pressure to avoid hospitalizing emergency department patients who can be treated safely as outpatients, but this strategy depends on timely access to follow-up care. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between reported insurance status and access to follow-up appointments for serious conditions that are commonly identified during an emergency department visit. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Eight research assistants called 499 randomly selected ambulatory clinics in 9 US cities (May 2002-February 2003) and identified themselves as new patients who had been seen in an emergency department and needed an urgent follow-up appointment (within 1 week) for 1 of 3 clinical vignettes (pneumonia, hypertension, or possible ectopic pregnancy). The same person called each clinic twice using the same clinical vignette but different insurance status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportion of callers who were offered an appointment within a week. RESULTS: Of 499 clinics contacted in the final sample, 430 completed the study protocol. Four hundred six (47.2%) of 860 total callers and 277 (64.4%) of 430 privately insured callers were offered appointments within a week. Callers who claimed to have private insurance were more likely to receive appointments than those who claimed to have Medicaid coverage (63.6% [147/231] vs 34.2% [79/231]; difference, 29.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 21.2-37.6; P<.001). Callers reporting private insurance coverage had higher appointment rates than callers who reported that they were uninsured but offered to pay 20 dollars and arrange payment of the balance (65.3% [130/199] vs 25.1% [50/199]; difference, 40.2; 95% confidence interval, 31.4-49.1; P<.001). There were no differences in appointment rates between callers who claimed to have private insurance coverage and those who reportedly were uninsured but willing to pay cash for the entire visit fee (66.3% [132/199] vs 62.8% [125/199]; difference, 3.5; 95% confidence interval -3.7 to 10.8; P = .31). The median charge was 100 dollars (range, 25 dollars-600 dollars). Seventy-two percent of clinics did not attempt to determine the severity of the caller's condition. CONCLUSIONS: Reported insurance status is associated with access to timely follow-up ambulatory care for potentially serious conditions. Having private insurance and being willing to pay cash may not eliminate the difficulty in obtaining urgent follow-up appointments.

Ambulatory Care Facilities↗
PubMed2004

Access to emergency care: restricted by long waiting times and cost and coverage concerns.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We monitor progress toward Healthy People 2010 objectives of reducing health disparities and decreasing delay and difficulty in access to emergency care. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of 2001 National Health Interview Survey interviews of 33,326 adults to provide population-based estimates of self-reported delay, difficulty, or inability to get care from a hospital emergency department (ED) in the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: About 7.7% of the estimated 36.6 million adults who sought care in a hospital ED in the preceding 12 months reported a delay in receiving care, having difficulty receiving care, or being unable to receive care. Waiting times were the most frequently noted cause of problems. Concerns about service costs and insurance coverage were also commonly cited access barriers. Access problems were more likely to be reported by adults without health insurance, younger adults, adults in fair or poor health, and adults with annual incomes of less than 20,000 dollars. CONCLUSION: Self-reported access to ED care is impeded by prolonged waiting times and by cost and insurance coverage concerns. These access problems are occurring more frequently among groups that face multiple social and economic disadvantages. Hospital operational changes to reduce ED treatment delays and health care financing policies that reduce insurance coverage inequities may both be needed to meet these Healthy People 2010 objectives.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Using online analytical processing to manage emergency department operations.

The emergency department (ED) is a unique setting in which to explore and evaluate the utility of information technology to improve health care operations. A potentially useful software tool in managing this complex environment is online analytical processing (OLAP). An OLAP system has the ability to provide managers, providers, and researchers with the necessary information to make decisions quickly and effectively by allowing them to examine patterns and trends in operations and patient flow. OLAP software quickly summarizes and processes data acquired from a variety of data sources, including computerized ED tracking systems. It allows the user to form a comprehensive picture of the ED from both system-wide and patient-specific perspectives and to interactively view the data using an approach that meets his or her needs. This article describes OLAP software tools and provides examples of potential OLAP applications for care improvement projects, primarily from the perspective of the ED. While OLAP is clearly a helpful tool in the ED, it is far more useful when integrated into the larger continuum of health information systems across a hospital or health care delivery system.

Decision Support Systems, Clinical↗
PubMed2004

Does improved access to care affect utilization and costs for patients with chronic conditions?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a major improvement in access (ie, implementing an open access system) in a large multispecialty medical group during 2000 was associated with changes in utilization or costs for patients with diabetes, coronary heart disease (CHD), or depression. STUDY DESIGN: Multilevel regression analysis of health plan administrative data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Approximately 7000 patients with diabetes, 3800 with CHD, and 6000 with depression who received all of their care in this care system served as the subjects for this study. Utilization and costs between 1999 and 2001 (before and after implementation of open access) were compared for these patients. The main outcome measures were rates of inpatient admissions and various types of outpatient encounters as well as associated costs for these subjects. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2001, total office visit changes were small and varied with condition, but the proportion of these visits made to primary care physicians increased significantly by an absolute 5% to 9% and primary care physician continuity increased for each condition. Urgent care visits also decreased significantly by an absolute 5% to 9%, but there was no change in emergency department visits or hospital admissions. Total costs of care for these patients were much larger than those for the overall population of the medical group, but increased at a similar rate. CONCLUSION: A major improvement in patient access to primary care clinics was associated with increased use and continuity of primary care for patients with 3 chronic conditions, but did not affect overall resource use.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Emergency department crowding: consensus development of potential measures.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We identify measures of emergency department (ED) and hospital workflow that would be of value in understanding, monitoring, and managing crowding. METHODS: A national group of 74 experts developed 113 potential measures using a conceptual model of ED crowding that segmented the measures into input, throughput, and output categories. Ten investigators then used group consensus methods to revise and consolidate them into a refined set of 30 measures that were rated by all 74 experts, who used a magnitude estimation technique on a Web site. Each measure was compared with a standard to obtain numeric ratings for feasibility, affordability, early warning potential, long-term planning potential, a summary rating of operational usefulness, and research potential. After review of the comprehensiveness of the resulting measures, 8 additional measures were developed and also rated by all reviewers. RESULTS: The original set of 113 measures (46 input, 35 throughput, and 32 output) was reduced to 38 through the iterative revision and rating process (15 input, 9 throughput, and 14 output). Summary scores in each rating category showed significant variation in ratings among the various potential measures. For measures that address similar concepts, the priority ranking depended on the rating category chosen. CONCLUSION: The final 38 measures of ED and hospital workflow provide a useful pool from which EDs and policymakers can draw to improve their ability to understand and address the issue of ED crowding. These measures require rigorous testing for feasibility, reliability, and value.

Consensus↗
PubMed2003

Hospital and emergency department crowding in the United States.

Every emergency physician in the United States and, for that matter, in many countries around the world recognizes that the demand for timely access to quality emergency care is one that patients highly value. Unfortunately, hospitals in the USA have become stretched beyond capacity, resulting in overloaded emergency departments, diverted ambulances, and greater risks for patients and providers. Some of the causes and consequences of emergency department crowding are unique to the USA health care system, while others are common to countries throughout the world. The goals for this paper are to provide a brief overview of hospital and emergency department crowding in the USA, to identify commonly cited causes of the problem, and to outline future directions in the search for solutions. A large number of hospitals, inpatient beds, and emergency departments have closed during the past 10 years in the USA. In 1992 there were around 6000 hospitals with emergency departments and there are now less than 4000. While hospitals scrambled to decrease an excess supply of inpatient beds, the demand for emergency department care steadily rose. Between 1992 and 2000, the annual number of emergency department visits in the USA increased from 89.8 to 108 million. While some areas of the USA have been affected more seriously than others (particularly the coasts), almost every state has reported problems with boarding of inpatients in the emergency department. Inpatient boarding is the most frequently cited reason for emergency department crowding within the emergency medicine community. United States hospitals are also struggling with a shortage of health care professionals, particularly registered nurses. There are several policy issues that must be addressed to alleviate hospital and emergency department crowding over the long term. We list these as 'long-term' goals simply because policy changes, in the USA, are often incremental and rarely occur quickly. In order to achieve any of these changes in policy over the long term, advocates for reform must aggressively pursue them today.

Crowding↗
PubMed2003

A conceptual model of emergency department crowding.

Emergency department (ED) crowding has become a major barrier to receiving timely emergency care in the United States. Despite widespread recognition of the problem, the research and policy agendas needed to understand and address ED crowding are just beginning to unfold. We present a conceptual model of ED crowding to help researchers, administrators, and policymakers understand its causes and develop potential solutions. The conceptual model partitions ED crowding into 3 interdependent components: input, throughput, and output. These components exist within an acute care system that is characterized by the delivery of unscheduled care. The goal of the conceptual model is to provide a practical framework on which an organized research, policy, and operations management agenda can be based to alleviate ED crowding.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2002

Designing a research agenda to improve the quality of emergency care.

A systematic approach to develop a research agenda for improving the quality of emergency care is presented. This approach is based on the six domains of quality outlined by the Institute of Medicine (effective, timely, efficient, safe, patient-centered, and equitable care) and a sequence of four research steps (evidence, synthesis, assessment, and intervention). Examples related to the care of patients with acute myocardial infarction are used to illustrate the proposed approach. Examples of other emergency medicine research topics relevant to the Institute of Medicine quality domains are also presented. Research to improve the quality of emergency care can benefit from a more systematic consideration of the domains of quality and the research steps necessary to generate evidence and inform quality improvement efforts in practice.

Emergency Medical Services↗