Search

Background: The four-hour target is a key hospital emergency department performance indicator in England and one that drives the physical and organisational design of the ED. Some studies have identified time of presentation as a key factor affecting waiting times. Few studies have investigated other determinants of breaching the four-hour target. Therefore, our objective was to describe patterns of emergency department breaches of the four-hour wait time target and identify patients at highest risk of breaching.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of a large type 1 Emergency department at an NHS teaching hospital in Oxford, England. We analysed anonymised individual level patient data for 378,873 emergency department attendances, representing all attendances between April 2008 and April 2013. We examined patient characteristics and emergency department presentation circumstances associated with the highest likelihood of breaching the four-hour wait time target.Results: We used 374,459 complete cases for analysis. In total, 8.3% of all patients breached the four-hour wait time target. The main determinants of patients breaching the four-hour wait time target were hour of arrival to the ED, day of the week, patient age, ED referral source, and the types of investigations patients receive (p < 0.01 for all associations). Patients most likely to breach the four-hour target were older, presented at night, presented on Monday, received multiple types of investigation in the emergency department, and were not self-referred (p < 0.01 for all associations). Patients attending from October to February had a higher odds of breaching compared to those attending from March to September (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.59 to 1.66).Conclusions: There are a number of independent patient and circumstantial factors associated with the probability of breaching the four-hour ED wait time target including patient age, ED referral source, the types of investigations patients receive, as well as the hour, day, and month of arrival to the ED. Efforts to reduce the number of breaches could explore late-evening/overnight staffing, access to diagnostic tests, rapid discharge facilities, and early assessment and input on diagnostic and management strategies from a senior practitioner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stroke risk after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) is highest in the first few days. It is greatly reduced by commencing commonly used medications. Current Australian guidelines recommend that all TIAs be managed urgently by secondary-care specialists (mandatory for high-risk TIAs). The majority of TIAs present to general practice which creates a dilemma when specialist care is not readily accessible. There is a lack of evidence relating to the determinants of general practitioners' (GPs) actions in this situation.Objective: To explore GP management of TIA presentations.Methods: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of a maximum variation sample of senior and trainee GPs from New South Wales, Australia. Data collection and thematic analysis were concurrent and iterative, employing constant comparison, co-coding, participant transcript review, reflexivity and continued until thematic saturation was achieved.Results: Management of TIA was heterogeneous and depended upon the GP's engagement with the individual case. The level of engagement was predicated on the GP's predisposition toward managing transient neurological presentations generally, the clinical phenotype of the presentation and logistical or health system factors. Management was categorised as triage, guided collaboration, consultative collaboration and independent management. Collaboration with secondary care increased the GP's capability to diagnose and manage future TIAs.Conclusion: Heterogeneity of TIA management equates with variation from guideline recommendations. However, Australian guidelines may not be practicable due to variability in access to secondary-care specialists. Future models of care should consider systems approaches such as telemedicine to promote collaboration and assist GPs to comply with guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accurate assessment of the need for admission is challenging in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care. Understanding more about patient contacts where the decision to continue care in the community may have been incorrect could assist clinicians in assessing clinical risk.Aim: To define the population contacting OOH primary care who are at higher risk of re-presenting to this service and requiring urgent transfer to secondary care within 3 days of their initial contact.Design and Setting: Retrospective service evaluation of 4 years of patient contacts with Oxfordshire OOH primary care.Method: Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate demographic and service delivery factors associated with increased risk of delayed escalation to secondary care.Results: Almost 1% of 496 931 patients contacting OOH primary care required escalation to secondary care within 3 days. Of these, 68.5% were initially discharged with no follow-up or advice to contact their GP; 14.7% were initially referred to secondary care. The odds of requiring escalation were increased with age (odds ratio [OR] 1.010; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.009 to 1.011; P<0.001), more frequent prior use of the OOH service (OR 1.016; 95% CI = 1.010 to 1.021; P<0.001), and presenting during periods of low call volume (OR 0.880; 95% CI = 0.857 to 0.904; P<0.001).Conclusion: Older, prior users of the service, presenting at less busy times, are at greater risk of requiring secondary care referral from the OOH service within 3 days of their initial contact. These higher-risk patient groups might benefit from active follow-up by the OOH service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many point of care diagnostic technologies are available which produce results within minutes, and offer the opportunity to deliver acute care out of hospital settings. Increasing access to diagnostics at the point of care could increase the volume and scope of acute ambulatory care. Yet these technologies are not routinely used in many settings. We aimed to explore how point of care testing is used in a setting where it has become ‘normalized’ (embedded in everyday practice), in order to inform future adoption and implementation in other settings. We used normalization process theory to guide our case study approach. Methods: We used a single case study design, choosing a community based ambulatory care unit where point of care testing is used routinely. A focused ethnographic approach was taken, including non-participant observation of all activities related to point of care testing, and semi-structured interviews, with all clinical staff involved in point of care testing at the unit. Data were analysed thematically, guided by normalization process theory. Results: Fourteen days of observation and six interviews were completed. Staff had a shared understanding of the purpose, value and benefits of point of care testing, believing it to be integral to the running of the unit. They organised themselves as a team to ensure that point of care testing worked effectively; and one key individual led a change in practice to ensure more consistency and trust in procedures. Staff assessed point of care testing as worthwhile for the unit, their patients, and themselves in terms of job satisfaction and knowledge. Potential barriers to adoption of point of care testing were evident (including lack of trust in the accuracy of some results compared to laboratory testing; and lack of ease of use of some aspects of the equipment); but these did not prevent point of care testing from becoming embedded, because the importance and value attributed to it were so strong. Conclusions: This case study offers insights into successful adoption of new diagnostic technologies into every day practice. Such analyses may be critical to realising their potential to change processes of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To assess the influence of general practice opening hours on health care seeking behaviour after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke and feasibility of clinical assessment within 24 hours of symptom onset. Design Population based prospective incidence study (Oxford vascular study). Setting Nine general practices in Oxfordshire. Participants 91 000 patients followed from 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2006. Main outcome measures Events that occurred overnight and at weekends (out of hours) and events that occurred during surgery hours. Results Among 359 patients with TIA and 434 with minor stroke, the median (interquartile range) time to call a general practitioner after an event during surgery hours was 4.0 (1.0- 45.5) hours, and 68% of patients with events during surgery hours called within 24 hours of onset of symptoms. Median (interquartile range) time to call a general practitioner after events out of hours was 24.8 (9.0-54.5) hours for patients who waited to contact their registered practice compared with 1.0 (0.3-2.6) hour in those who used an emergency general practitioner service (P<0.001). In patients with events out of hours who waited to see their own general practitioner, seeking attention within 24 hours was considerably less likely for events at weekends than weekdays (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.21): 70% with events Monday to Friday, 33% on Sundays, and none on Saturdays. Thirteen patients who had events out of hours and did not seek emergency care had a recurrent stroke before they sought medical attention. A primary care centre open 8 am-8 pm seven days a week would have offered cover to 73 patients who waited until surgery hours to call their general practitioner, reducing median delay from 50.1 hours to 4.0 hours in that group and increasing those calling within 24 hours from 34% to 68%. Conclusions General practitioners' opening hours influence patients' healthcare seeking behaviour after TIA and minor stroke. Current opening hours can increase delay in assessment. Improved access to primary care and public education about the need for emergency care are required if the relevant targets in the national stroke strategy are to be met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]