Search

Background: Previous research revealed the vulnerability of frequent users of emergency department (FUED) because of concomitant medical, psychological and social issues. Case management (CM) provides FUED with effective medical and social support, however, the heterogeneity of this population has highlighted the need to explore the specific needs of FUED subpopulations. In response, this study aimed to explore qualitatively the lived experience of migrant and non-migrant FUED in the healthcare system to identify unmet needs., Methods: Adult migrant and non-migrant FUED (≥ 5 visits in the ED in the past 12 months) were recruited in a Swiss university hospital to collect qualitative data on their experience within the Swiss health system. Participants were selected based on predefined quotas for gender and age. Researchers conducted one-on-one semistructured interviews until reaching data saturation. Inductive conventional content analysis was used to analyse qualitative data., Results: In total, 23 semistructured interviews were conducted (11 migrant FUED and 12 non-migrant FUED). Four main themes emerged from the qualitative analysis: (1) self-evaluation of the Swiss healthcare system; (2) orientation within the healthcare system; (3) relationship with caregivers and (4) perception of own health. While both groups were overall satisfied with the healthcare system and care provided, migrant FUED reported language and financial barriers to access it. Both groups expressed overall satisfaction over their relationship with healthcare professionals, although migrant FUED reported a feeling of illegitimacy to consult the ED based on social status, whereas non-migrant FUED felt more often the need to justify their use of the ED. Finally, migrant FUED perceived their own health to be affected by their status., Conclusion: This study highlighted difficulties specific to subpopulations of FUED. For migrant FUED, these included access to care and impact of migrant status on own health. Adapting CM to the specific needs of migrant FUED could help reduce their vulnerability., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Frequent users of emergency departments (FUED) account for a disproportionate number of emergency department (ED) visits and contribute to a wide range of challenges for ED staff. While several research has documented that case management (CM) tailored to FUED leads to a reduction in ED visits and a better quality of life (QoL) among FUED, whether there is added value for ED staff remains to be explored. This study aimed to compare, among staff in two academic EDs in Switzerland (one with and one without CM), the FUED-related knowledge, perceptions of the extent of the FUED issue, FUED-related work challenges and FUEDs' legitimacy to use ED., Method: Mixed methods were employed. First, ED physicians and nurses (N = 253) of the two EDs completed an online survey assessing their knowledge and perceptions of FUEDs. Results between healthcare providers working in an ED with CM to those working in an ED without CM were compared using independent two-sided T-tests. Next, a sample of participants (n = 16) took part in a qualitative assessment via one-to-one interviews (n = 6) or focus groups (n = 10)., Results: Both quantitative and qualitative results documented that the FUED-related knowledge, the extent FUED were perceived as an issue and perceived FUEDs' legitimacy to use ED were not different between groups. The level of perceived FUED-related challenges was also similar between groups. Quantitative results showed that nurses with CM experienced more challenges related to FUED. Qualitative exploration revealed that lack of psychiatric staff within the emergency team and lack of communication between ED staff and CM team were some of the explanations behind these counterintuitive findings., Conclusion: Despite promising results on FUEDs' QoL and frequency of ED visits, these preliminary findings suggest that CM may provide limited support to ED staff in its current form. Given the high burden of FUED-related challenges encountered by ED staff, improved communication and FUED-related knowledge transfer between ED staff and the CM team should be prioritized to increase the value of a FUED CM intervention for ED staff., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Frequent users of emergency departments (FUED; ≥ 5 ED visits/year) commonly cumulate medical, social, and substance use problems requiring complex and sustained care coordination often unavailable in ED. This study aimed to explore ED healthcare providers' challenges related to FUED care to gain insight into the support and resources required to address FUED complex needs. An online survey was sent to all general adult emergency services within Switzerland (N = 106). Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they perceived that FUED represented a problem and to describe the main challenges encountered. In total, 208 physicians and nurses from 75 EDs (70.7%) completed the survey. Among the 208 participants, 134 (64%) reported that FUED represented a challenge and 133 described 1 to 5 challenges encountered. A conventional content analysis yielded 4 main categories of perceived challenges. Negative consequences in the ED secondary to FUED's presence (eg, ED overcrowding, staff helplessness, and fatigue) was the most frequently reported challenge, followed by challenges related to FUEDs' characteristics (eg, mental health and social problems) leading to healthcare complexity. The third most frequently encountered challenge was related to the ED inappropriateness and inefficiency to address FUEDs' needs. Finally, challenges related to the lack of FUED healthcare network were the least often mentioned. ED healthcare providers experience a wide range of challenges related to FUED care. These findings suggest that currently EDs nor their staff are equipped to address FUEDs' complex needs.

For decades, emergency departments of hospitals in industrialized countries have been dealing with the challenges of a group of patients responsible for a disproportionate number of emergency room visits : the emergency department frequent users. Although they represent only a minority of all emergency department patients, their healthcare can often be complex if not difficult due to their health vulnerability (e. g., psychiatric disorders associated with substance addictions), often aggravated by a precarious psycho-social context (e. g., homelessness, illegal status, poverty, etc.). Taking care of these patients by using a case management approach can promote the development of an interprofessional and coordinated healthcare plan that includes their empowerment., Competing Interests: Les auteurs n’ont déclaré aucun conflit d’intérêts en relation avec cet article.

Background: ED overcrowding represents a significant public health problem in developed countries. Frequent users of the emergency departments (FUEDs; reporting 5 or more ED visits in the past year) are often affected by medical, psychological, social, and substance use problems and account for a disproportionately high number of ED visits. Past research indicates that case management (CM) interventions are a promising way to reduce ED overcrowding and improve FUEDs' quality of life. There is, however, very limited knowledge about how to disseminate and implement this intervention on a large scale to diverse clinical settings, including community hospitals and non-academic centers. This paper describes the protocol of a research project aiming to implement a CM intervention tailored to FUEDs in the public hospitals with ED in the French-speaking region of Switzerland and evaluate both the implementation process and effectiveness of the CM intervention., Methods: This research project uses a hybrid study design assessing both implementation and clinical outcomes. The implementation part of the study uses mixed methods a) to describe quantitatively and qualitatively factors that influence the implementation process, and b) to examine implementation effectiveness. The clinical part of the study uses a within-subject design (pre-post intervention) to evaluate participants' trajectories on clinical variables (e.g., quality of life, ED use) after receiving the CM intervention. We designed the study based on two implementation science frameworks. The Generic Implementation Framework guided the overall research protocol design, whereas the RE-AIM (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation and maintenance) framework guided the implementation and effectiveness evaluations., Discussion: This research project will contribute to implementation science by providing key insights into the processes of implementing CM into broader practice. This research project is also likely to have both clinical and public health implications., Trial Registration: NCT03641274 , Registered 20 August 2018.

Background: In most emergency departments (EDs), few patients account for a relatively high number of ED visits. To improve the management of these patients, the university hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland, implemented an interdisciplinary case management (CM) intervention. This study examined whether the CM intervention-compared with standard care (SC) in the ED-reduced costs generated by frequent ED users, not only from the hospital perspective, but also from the third-party payer perspective, that is, from a broader perspective that takes into account the costs of health care services used outside the hospital offering the intervention., Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 250 frequent ED users (>5 visits during the previous 12 months) were allocated to either the CM or the SC group and followed up for 12 months. Cost data were obtained from the hospital's analytical accounting system for the entire sample and from health insurance companies for a subgroup (n = 140). Descriptive statistics and multivariate regressions were used to make comparisons between groups and assess the contribution of patient characteristics to the main cost components., Results: At the end of the 12-month follow-up, 115 patients were in the CM group and 115 in the SC group (20 had died). Despite differences in economic costs between patients in the CM intervention and the SC groups, our results do not show any statistically significant reduction in costs associated with the intervention, either for the hospital that housed the intervention or for the third-party payer. Frequent ED users were big users of health services provided by both the hospital and community-based services, with 40% of costs generated outside the hospital that housed the intervention. Higher age, Swiss citizenship, and having social difficulty increased costs significantly., Conclusions: As the role of the CM team is to guide patients through the entire care process, the intervention location is not limited to the hospital but often extends into the community., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objectives: Frequent Emergency Department (ED) users have an elevated mortality, yet little is known about risk factors. Our aim was to characterize deceased frequent ED users and determine predictors of mortality., Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of all-cause mortality among frequent ED users participating in a randomized clinical trial on case management at the Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland). We enrolled 250 frequent ED users (5+ visits/past year) in a 12-month randomized clinical trial; those with an estimated survival of fewer than 18 months were excluded. The primary outcome was 12-month all-cause mortality. We performed descriptive statistics to compare the baseline characteristics of living and deceased participants, and examined predictors of all-cause mortality using logistic regressions, including age adjustment., Results: Twenty of the 250 (8%) frequent users died during the 12-month follow-up. Seven (35%) deaths were because of cardiac causes and six (30%) were because of cancer. The median age at death was 71 years. Deceased participants were older and more likely to report any somatic determinant, chronic illness, and medical comorbidity. Age (odds ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.11) and medical comorbidity (odds ratio 4.76, 95% confidence interval 1.86-12.15) were statistically significant predictors of mortality., Conclusion: Despite excluding those with an estimated survival of fewer than 18 months, 8% of frequent ED users died during the study. Age and medical comorbidity were significant predictors of mortality. Interventions, such as case management, should target older frequent ED users and those with multiple medical conditions, and future research should explore their potential impact on mortality.

Purpose: Frequent Emergency Department users are likely to experience poor quality of life (QOL). Case management interventions are efficient in responding to the complex needs of this population, but their effects on QOL have not been tested yet. Therefore, the aim of our study was to examine to what extent a case management intervention improved frequent Emergency Department users' QOL in a universal health coverage system., Methods: Data were part of a randomized controlled trial designed to improve frequent Emergency Department users' QOL at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. A total of 250 frequent Emergency Department users (≥ 5 attendances during the previous 12 months) were randomly assigned to the control (n = 125) or the intervention group (n = 125). The latter benefited from case management intervention. QOL was evaluated using the WHOQOL-BREF at baseline, two, five and a half, nine, and twelve months later. It included four dimensions: physical health, psychological health, social relationship, and environment. Linear mixed-effects models were used to analyze the change in the patients' QOL over time., Results: Patients' QOL improved significantly (p < 0.001) in both groups for all dimensions after two months. However, environment QOL dimension improved significantly more in the intervention group after 12 months., Conclusions: Environment QOL dimension was the most responsive dimension for short-term interventions. This may have been due to case management's assistance in obtaining income entitlements, health insurance coverage, stable housing, or finding general health care practitioners. Case management in general should be developed to enhance frequent users' QOL., Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov , Unique identifier: NCT01934322.

Background: Frequent emergency department (ED) users account for a disproportionately high number of ED visits. Studies on case management (CM) interventions to reduce frequent ED use have shown mixed results, and few studies have been conducted within a universal health coverage system., Objective: To determine whether a CM intervention-compared to standard emergency care-reduces ED attendance., Design: Randomized controlled trial., Participants: Two hundred fifty frequent ED users (5 or more visits in the prior 12 months) who visited a public urban ED at the Lausanne University Hospital between May 2012 and July 2013 were allocated to either an intervention (n = 125) or control (n = 125) group, and monitored for 12 months., Interventions: An individualized CM intervention consisting of concrete assistance in obtaining income entitlements, referral to primary or specialty medical care, access to mental health care or substance abuse treatment, and counseling on at-risk behaviors and health care utilization (in addition to standard care) at baseline and 1, 3, and 5 months., Main Measures: We used a generalized linear model for count data (negative binomial distribution) to compare the number of ED visits during the 12-month follow-up between CM and usual care, from an intention-to-treat perspective., Key Results: At 12 months, there were 2.71 (±0.23) ED visits in the intervention group versus 3.35 (±0.32) visits among controls (ratio = 0.81, 95 % CI = 0.63; 1.02). In the multivariate model, the effect of the CM intervention on the number of ED visits approached statistical significance (b = -0.219, p = 0.075). The presence of poor social determinants of health was a significant predictor of ED use in the multivariate model (b = 0.280, p = 0.048)., Conclusions: CM may reduce ED use by frequent users through an improved orientation to the health care system. Poor social determinants of health significantly increase use of the ED by frequent users.

Objective: Frequent Emergency Department (ED) users are vulnerable individuals and discrimination is usually associated with increased vulnerability. The aim of this study was to investigate frequent ED users' perceptions of discrimination and to test whether they were associated with increased vulnerability., Methods: In total, 250 adult frequent ED users were interviewed in Lausanne University Hospital. From a previously published questionnaire, we assessed 15 dichotomous sources of perceived discrimination. Vulnerability was assessed using health status: objective health status (evaluation by a healthcare practitioner including somatic, mental health, behavioral, and social issues - dichotomous variables) and subjective health status [self-evaluation including health-related quality of life (WHOQOL) and quality of life (EUROQOL) - mean-scores]. We computed the prevalence rates of perceived discrimination and tested associations between perceived discrimination and health status (Fischer's exact tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests)., Results: A total of 35.2% of the frequent ED users surveyed reported at least one source of perceived discrimination. Objective health status was not significantly related to perceived discrimination. In contrast, experiencing perceived discrimination was associated with worse subjective health status (P<0.001)., Conclusion: Frequent ED users are highly likely to report perceived discrimination during ED use, and this was linked to a decrease in their own rating of their health. Hence, discrimination should be taken into account when providing care to such users as it may constitute an additional risk factor for this vulnerable population. Perceived discrimination may also be of concern to professionals seeking to improve practices and provide optimal care to frequent ED users.

Aims: To assess the prevalence of alcohol use disorder (AUD), substance use, mental health and social status 7 years following an Emergency Department (ED) admission for alcohol intoxication. To assess gender differences in these prevalences., Methods: Cohort of 631 patients aged 18-30 years admitted for alcohol intoxication in 2006-2007 at a tertiary referral hospital in Switzerland, contacted for an interview in 2014. Assessment consisted of demography, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption, Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for AUD, Patient Health Questionnaire (depression, anxiety) and lifetime/past year use of tobacco/illegal drugs. Gender differences were assessed with Chi-square tests, t-tests and Wilcoxon tests., Results: In 2014, 318/631 (50.4%) completed the interview. Study completers were not different from non-completers on baseline characteristics (all P > 0.2). Of study completers, 36.8% were unemployed, 56.9% reported hazardous alcohol use, 15.1% alcohol dependence, 13.2% harmful use, 18.6% depression, 15.4% anxiety disorder. Prevalence of any use (lifetime/past year) was 93.4%/80.2% for tobacco, 86.6%/53.1% for cannabis, 54.7%/22.6% for cocaine, 25.6%/13.5% for sedatives, 40.9%/11.0% for stimulants, 21.7%/7.2% for opioids. Men reported significantly more binge drinking, AUD, cannabis use (past year) and more lifetime cannabis, cocaine and stimulants use (all P < 0.05). There was no gender difference in the prevalence of hazardous alcohol use and tobacco use. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders was significantly higher in women (P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Seven years after being admitted for alcohol intoxication, young patients are likely to present substance misuse, mental health disorders and social problems, suggesting  that they should be offered secondary prevention measures while in the ED., Short Summary: We studied a cohort of patients aged 18-30 and admitted for alcohol intoxication in 2006-2007 at a tertiary hospital. Participants were interviewed in 2014. Seven years after an admission for alcohol intoxication, patients are likely to present AUDs, substance misuse, mental health disorders and social problems., (© The Author 2016. Medical Council on Alcohol and Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.)

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.

Background: The objectives of this study were to determine the proportions of psychiatric and substance use disorders suffered by emergency departments' (EDs') frequent users compared to the mainstream ED population, to evaluate how effectively these disorders were diagnosed in both groups of patients by ED physicians, and to determine if these disorders were predictive of a frequent use of ED services., Methods: This study is a cross-sectional study with concurrent and retrospective data collection. Between November 2009 and June 2010, patients' mental health and substance use disorders were identified prospectively in face-to-face research interviews using a screening questionnaire (i.e. researcher screening). These data were compared to the data obtained from a retrospective medical chart review performed in August 2011, searching for mental health and substance use disorders diagnosed by ED physicians and recorded in the patients' ED medical files (i.e. ED physician diagnosis). The sample consisted of 399 eligible adult patients (≥18 years old) admitted to the urban, general ED of a University Hospital. Among them, 389 patients completed the researcher screening. Two hundred and twenty frequent users defined by >4 ED visits in the previous twelve months were included and compared to 169 patients with ≤4 ED visits in the same period (control group)., Results: Researcher screening showed that ED frequent users were more likely than members of the control group to have an anxiety, depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or suffer from alcohol, illicit drug abuse/addiction. Reviewing the ED physician diagnosis, we found that the proportions of mental health and substance use disorders diagnosed by ED physicians were low both among ED frequent users and in the control group. Using multiple logistic regression analyses to predict frequent ED use, we found that ED patients who screened positive for psychiatric disorders only and those who screened positive for both psychiatric and substance use disorders were more likely to be ED frequent users compared to ED patients with no disorder., Conclusions: This study found high proportions of screened mental health and/or substance use disorders in ED frequent users, but it showed low rates of detection of such disorders in day-to-day ED activities which can be a cause for concern. Active screening for these disorders in this population, followed by an intervention and/or a referral for treatment by a case-management team may constitute a relevant intervention for integration into a general ED setting.

Background: We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients' emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers., Methods/design: We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient's allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N = 125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N = 125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient's satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later., Discussion: Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01934322.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the demographic, social and medical characteristics, and healthcare use of highly frequent users of a university hospital emergency department (ED) in Switzerland., Methods: A retrospective consecutive case series was performed. We included all highly frequent users, defined as patients attending the ED 12 times or more within a calendar year (1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009). We collected their characteristics and calculated a score of accumulation of risk factors of vulnerability., Results: Highly frequent users comprised 0.1% of ED patients, and they accounted for 0.8% of all ED attendances (23 patients, 425 attendances). Of all highly frequent users, 87% had a primary care practitioner, 82.6% were unemployed, 73.9% were socially isolated, and 60.9% had a mental health or substance use primary diagnosis. One-third had attempted suicide during study period, all of them being women. They were often admitted (24.0% of attendances), and only 8.7% were uninsured. On average, they cumulated 3.3 different risk factors of vulnerability (SD 1.4)., Conclusion: Highly frequent users of a Swiss academic ED are a highly vulnerable population. They are in poor health and accumulate several risk factors of being even in poorer health. The small number of patients and their high level of insurance coverage make it particularly feasible to design a specific intervention to approach their needs, in close collaboration with their primary care practitioner. Elaboration of the intervention should focus on social reinsertion and risk-reduction strategies with regard to substance use, hospital admissions and suicide.

Objectives: The objectives were to identify the social and medical factors associated with emergency department (ED) frequent use and to determine if frequent users were more likely to have a combination of these factors in a universal health insurance system., Methods: This was a retrospective chart review case-control study comparing randomized samples of frequent users and nonfrequent users at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. The authors defined frequent users as patients with four or more ED visits within the previous 12 months. Adult patients who visited the ED between April 2008 and March 2009 (study period) were included, and patients leaving the ED without medical discharge were excluded. For each patient, the first ED electronic record within the study period was considered for data extraction. Along with basic demographics, variables of interest included social (employment or housing status) and medical (ED primary diagnosis) characteristics. Significant social and medical factors were used to construct a logistic regression model, to determine factors associated with frequent ED use. In addition, comparison of the combination of social and medical factors was examined., Results: A total of 359 of 1,591 frequent and 360 of 34,263 nonfrequent users were selected. Frequent users accounted for less than a 20th of all ED patients (4.4%), but for 12.1% of all visits (5,813 of 48,117), with a maximum of 73 ED visits. No difference in terms of age or sex occurred, but more frequent users had a nationality other than Swiss or European (n = 117 [32.6%] vs. n = 83 [23.1%], p = 0.003). Adjusted multivariate analysis showed that social and specific medical vulnerability factors most increased the risk of frequent ED use: being under guardianship (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 15.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.7 to 147.3), living closer to the ED (adjusted OR = 4.6; 95% CI = 2.8 to 7.6), being uninsured (adjusted OR = 2.5; 95% CI = 1.1 to 5.8), being unemployed or dependent on government welfare (adjusted OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.3 to 3.4), the number of psychiatric hospitalizations (adjusted OR = 4.6; 95% CI = 1.5 to 14.1), and the use of five or more clinical departments over 12 months (adjusted OR = 4.5; 95% CI = 2.5 to 8.1). Having two of four social factors increased the odds of frequent ED use (adjusted = OR 5.4; 95% CI = 2.9 to 9.9), and similar results were found for medical factors (adjusted OR = 7.9; 95% CI = 4.6 to 13.4). A combination of social and medical factors was markedly associated with ED frequent use, as frequent users were 10 times more likely to have three of them (on a total of eight factors; 95% CI = 5.1 to 19.6)., Conclusions: Frequent users accounted for a moderate proportion of visits at the Lausanne ED. Social and medical vulnerability factors were associated with frequent ED use. In addition, frequent users were more likely to have both social and medical vulnerabilities than were other patients. Case management strategies might address the vulnerability factors of frequent users to prevent inequities in health care and related costs., (© 2012 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

Study Objective: Frequent users of emergency departments (EDs) are a relatively small group of vulnerable patients accounting for a disproportionally high number of ED visits. Our objective is to perform a systematic review of the type and effectiveness of interventions to reduce the number of ED visits by frequent users., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, the Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science for randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials, interrupted time series, and controlled and noncontrolled before-and-after studies describing interventions targeting adult frequent users of EDs. Primary outcome of interest was the reduction in ED use. We also explored costs analyses and various clinical (alcohol and drug use, psychiatric symptoms, mortality) and social (homelessness, insurance status, social security support) outcomes., Results: We included 11 studies (3 randomized controlled trials, 2 controlled and 6 noncontrolled before-and-after studies). Heterogeneity in both study designs and definitions of frequent users precluded meta-analyses of the results. The most studied intervention was case management (n=7). Only 1 of 3 randomized controlled trials showed a significant reduction in ED use compared with usual care. Six of the 8 before-and-after studies reported a significant reduction in ED use, and 1 study showed a significant increase. ED cost reductions were demonstrated in 3 studies. Social outcomes such as reduction of homelessness were favorable in 3 of 3 studies, and clinical outcomes trended toward positive results in 2 of 3 studies., Conclusion: Interventions targeting frequent users may reduce ED use. Case management, the most frequently described intervention, reduced ED costs and seemed to improve social and clinical outcomes. It appears to be beneficial to patients and justifiable for hospitals to implement case management for frequent users in the framework of a clear and consensual definition of frequent users and standardized outcome measures., (Copyright © 2011 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)