• BMC geriatrics · Dec 2018

    Pragmatic Clinical Trial

    The Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention model of care: a pragmatic trial.

    • Marianne Wallis, Elizabeth Marsden, Andrea Taylor, Alison Craswell, Marc Broadbent, Adrian Barnett, Kim-Huong Nguyen, Colleen Johnston, Amanda Glenwright, and Julia Crilly.
    • School of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, University of Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sippy Downs, QLD, 4556, Australia. mwallis@usc.edu.au.
    • BMC Geriatr. 2018 Dec 3; 18 (1): 297.

    BackgroundTo evaluate a Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention (GEDI) model of service delivery for adults aged 70 years and older.MethodsA pragmatic trial of the GEDI model using a pre-post design. GEDI is a nurse-led, physician-championed, Emergency Department (ED) intervention; developed to improve the care of frail older adults in the ED. The nurses had gerontology experience and education and provided targeted geriatric assessment and streamlining of care. The final format included 2.4 full time equivalent nurses working 7 days from 0700 h to 1730 h (1530 h at weekends). There were three implementations periods: pre-implementation (2012); a developmental phase from January 2013 to August 2015; and full implementation from September 2015 to August 2016. The outcomes measured were disposition (discharged home, admitted or died); ED length of stay; hospital length of stay; all cause in-hospital mortality within 28 days; time to ED re-presentation up to 28 days post-discharge; in-hospital costs. The setting was a tertiary hospital ED, with 385 beds, in Queensland, Australia. Approximately 53,000 patients presented to the ED annually with 20% aged 70 years and older. All patients over the age 70 who presented to the ED between January 2012 and August 2016 (n = 44,983) were included in the trial.ResultsOlder persons who presented to the ED when the GEDI team were working had increased likelihoods of discharge (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.13-1.24) and reduced ED length of stay (HR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.33-1.52) compared with those who presented when GEDI were not working. There was no increase in the risk of mortality (HR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.23-4.43) or risk of same cause re-presentation to 28 days (HR = 1.21; 95% CI: 0.99-1.49). The GEDI service resulted in average cost savings per ED presentation of $35 [95% CI, $21, $49] and savings of $1469 [95% CI, $1105, $1834] per hospital admission.ConclusionsImplementation of a nurse-led physician-championed model of ED care, focused on frail older adults, reduced ED length of stay, hospital admission and if admitted, hospital length of stay and cost, without increasing mortality or same cause re-presentation. These increases were sustained over time and after the initial implementation team had changed roles.Trial RegistrationAustralian Clinical Trials Registration Number ACTRN12615001157561 - retrospectively registered on 29/10/2015. Data were retrieved via retrospective access to clinical information systems. First data access was on 1/7/2015.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…