An Effective Methodology for Scoring to Assist Emergency Physicians in Identifying Overcrowding in an Academic Emergency Department in Thailand
摘要
Emergency Department (ED) overcrowding is a global concern, with tools like NEDOCS, READI, and Work Score used as predictors. These tools aid healthcare professionals in identifying overcrowding and preventing negative patient outcomes. However, there’s no agreed-upon method to define ED overcrowding. Most studies on this topic are U.S.-based, limiting their applicability in EDs without waiting rooms or ambulance diversion roles. Additionally, the intricate calculations required for these scores, with multiple variables, make them impractical for use in developing nations.
ObjectiveThis study sought to examine the relationship between prevalent ED overcrowding scores such as EDWIN, occupancy rate, and Work Score, and a modified version of EDWIN newly introduced by the authors, in comparison to the real-time perspectives of emergency physicians. Additionally, the study explored the links between these overcrowding scores and adverse events related to ED code activations as secondary outcomes.
MethodThe method described in the provided text is a correlational study. The study aims to examine the relationship between various Emergency Department (ED) overcrowding scores and the real-time perceptions of emergency physicians in every two-hour period. Additionally, it seeks to explore the associations between these scores and adverse events related to ED code activations.
ResultsThe study analyzed 459 periods, with 5.2% having Likert scores of 5–6. EDOR had the highest correlation coefficient (0.69, p < 0.001) and an AUC of 0.864. Only EDOR significantly correlated with adverse events (p = 0.033).
ConclusionEDOR shows the most robust link with ‘emergency physicians’ views on overcrowding. Additionally, elevated EDOR scores correlate with a rise in adverse events. Emergency physicians’ perceptionof overcrowding could hint at possible adverse events. Notably, all overcrowding scores have high negative predictive values, efficiently negating the likelihood of adverse incidents.