Journals / Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine / 2021 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1

Initial Versus Final Diagnosis in Patients Who Presented to theEmergency Department Without Trauma: A Prospective Cohort Study

Pages
1–5
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Emergency invasive intervention was significantly more common among patients with changed diagnosis (cDx) (40.9% vs 4.1%, p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: In the emergency department (ED), some patients are discharged after their initial diagnosis and treatment, whereas others are hospitalized for treatment and/or further diagnostic examination.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data recorded for each patient are the following: demographic information, vital signs, diagnosis upon admission, diagnosis after hospitalization, length of stay, mortality, and complications.Results: A total of 740 patients that met the inclusion criteria participated in this study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Emergency invasive intervention was significantly more common among patients with changed diagnosis (cDx) (40.9% vs 4.1%, p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: In the emergency department (ED), some patients are discharged after their initial diagnosis and treatment, whereas others are hospitalized for treatment and/or further diagnostic examination. The ED physician usually does not receive feedback regarding diagnostic accuracy, treatment effectiveness, or morbidity or mortality of the patient. In this study, patients in the ED without trauma were followed up to obtain their data.Materials and Methods: This prospective cohort study includes all patients without trauma who are admitted to the ED of a tertiary hospital during the two-month time frame and were hospitalized in various clinics. Data recorded for each patient are the following: demographic information, vital signs, diagnosis upon admission, diagnosis after hospitalization, length of stay, mortality, and complications.Results: A total of 740 patients that met the inclusion criteria participated in this study. The mean age was 54 years, wherein 398 patients (53.8%) were male. The initial diagnosis of 22 patients (2.9%) changed after further examinations. The mean age of these patients were 42 years, and 11 patients were male (50%). Emergency invasive intervention was significantly more common among patients with changed diagnosis (cDx) (40.9% vs 4.1%, p

🔖

Cite This Article

bedel, C., Korkut, M., Soyuncu, S., Mutlu, H. (2022). Initial Versus Final Diagnosis in Patients Who Presented to theEmergency Department Without Trauma: A Prospective Cohort Study. Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1, 1–5. https://ajindex.com/articles/507923

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ukkonen M, Jämsen E, Zeitlin R, Pauniaho SL. Emergency department visits in older patients: a population-based survey. BMC Emerg Med. 2019;19:20
  2. Moe J, Kirkland SW, Rawe E, Ospina MB, Vandermeer B, Campbell S, et al. Effectiveness of interventions to decrease emergency department visits by adult frequent users: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med. 2017;24:40-52
  3. Moonen PJ, Mercelina L, Boer W, Fret T. Diagnostic error in the Emergency Department: follow up of patients with minor trauma in the outpatient clinic. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2017;25:13
  4. Giannakopoulos G, Saltzherr T, Beenen L, Reitsma J, Bloemers F, Goslings JC, et al. Missed injuries during the initial assessment in a cohort of 1124 level-1 trauma patients. Injury. 2012;43:1517-21
  5. Ferguson B, Geralds J, Petrey J, Huecker M. Malpractice in Emergency Medicine-a review of risk and mitigation practices for the emergency medicine provider. J Emerg Med. 2018;55:659-65
  6. Fernholm R, Pukk Härenstam K, Wachtler C, Nilsson GH, Holzmann MJ, Carlsson AC. Diagnostic errors reported in primary healthcare and emergency departments: A retrospective and descriptive cohort study of 4830 reported cases of preventable harm in Sweden. Eur J Gen Pract. 2019;25:128-35
  7. Okafor N, Payne VL, Chathampally Y, Miller S, Doshi P, Singh H. Using voluntary reports from physicians to learn from diagnostic errors in emergency medicine. Emerg Med J. 2016;33:245-52
  8. Weinberger SE. Providing High-value, cost-conscious care: a critical seventh general competency for physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:386-88
  9. Kılıçaslan İ, Bozan H, Oktay C, Göksu E. Demographic properties of patients presenting to the emergency department in Turkey. Turk J Emerg Med. 2005;5:5-13
  10. Akpinar O, Turkdogan KA, Kapci M, Duman A. Use of emergency department by elderly patients. J Clin Anal Med. 2015;6:310-4
  11. Sert PC, Durak VA, Ozdemir F, Armağan E. Determination of the appropriate emergency department design according to patient characteristics. J Uludag Uni Med Fac. 2017;43:17-21
  12. Dikme O, Atilla R, Oray NC, Saracoglu G, Girgin MC, Akyol PY. Dokuz Eylul Triage System: A five category triage algorithm, reliability and validity study. Anatolian J Emerg Med. 2019:2:1-7
  13. Collins A, Barnicot K, Sen P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of personality disorder prevalence and patient outcomes in emergency departments. J Pers Disord. 2018:1-24
  14. Warren MB, Campbell RL, Nestler DM, Pasupathy KS, Lohse CM,