Backround: To compare paediatric Emergency Department (ED) attendances and admission outcomes in twoEuropean hospitals with different paediatric primary care set-up. Methods: This is a retrospective prevalence study comparing all paediatric ED attendances during calendar years 2013 in two EDs with similar catchment area: one in Italy (Trieste) where paediatric primary care is provided by office paediatricians, the other, in the UK (Cambridge), where paediatric primary care is provided by general practitioners. Data on reason for presentation, discharge diagnosis and admission rate were collected and sub-group analysis for specific age groups (<1 year, 1 – 4 years, 5 – 15 years) was performed. Results: Over 12 months, 20.331 children (0 – 15 years old) were seen in Cambridge and 18.646 in Trieste, with a very similar age distribution in both centres, except for the youngest age group: the percentage of infants seen in comparison with the total number of children attending ED was 1/3 higher in England than in Italy (15.4% vs 11. 4%). The reasons for attendance were similar: under 1 year of age, the chief complaints were fever, breathing difficulties and gastrointestinal problems while in the older age groups trauma represented the commonest reason. Among discharge diagnoses, no differences were found between the two hospitals, except for faltering growth and “ well child ” , more frequently diagnosed in English children under 5 years. The proportion of admissions was three times higher in Cambridge (14.1% vs 4.8%) with most children being admitted for infectious diseases. Conclusions: ED attendances in infants are more common in a primary care setting provided by general practicioner and, moreover, admission rates in all age groups are 1/3 reduced by primary care based paediatricians. Due to the methodological limits of this study, it isn't possible to evaluate whether these results depend only on paediatric primary care set-up or be determined by other confounding factors. New studies are needed to confirm this preliminary evidence.

Comparison of two European paediatric emergency departments: Does primary care organisation influence emergency attendance?

Barbi, E.;VENTURA, ALESSANDRO
2017

Abstract

Backround: To compare paediatric Emergency Department (ED) attendances and admission outcomes in twoEuropean hospitals with different paediatric primary care set-up. Methods: This is a retrospective prevalence study comparing all paediatric ED attendances during calendar years 2013 in two EDs with similar catchment area: one in Italy (Trieste) where paediatric primary care is provided by office paediatricians, the other, in the UK (Cambridge), where paediatric primary care is provided by general practitioners. Data on reason for presentation, discharge diagnosis and admission rate were collected and sub-group analysis for specific age groups (<1 year, 1 – 4 years, 5 – 15 years) was performed. Results: Over 12 months, 20.331 children (0 – 15 years old) were seen in Cambridge and 18.646 in Trieste, with a very similar age distribution in both centres, except for the youngest age group: the percentage of infants seen in comparison with the total number of children attending ED was 1/3 higher in England than in Italy (15.4% vs 11. 4%). The reasons for attendance were similar: under 1 year of age, the chief complaints were fever, breathing difficulties and gastrointestinal problems while in the older age groups trauma represented the commonest reason. Among discharge diagnoses, no differences were found between the two hospitals, except for faltering growth and “ well child ” , more frequently diagnosed in English children under 5 years. The proportion of admissions was three times higher in Cambridge (14.1% vs 4.8%) with most children being admitted for infectious diseases. Conclusions: ED attendances in infants are more common in a primary care setting provided by general practicioner and, moreover, admission rates in all age groups are 1/3 reduced by primary care based paediatricians. Due to the methodological limits of this study, it isn't possible to evaluate whether these results depend only on paediatric primary care set-up or be determined by other confounding factors. New studies are needed to confirm this preliminary evidence.
https://ijponline.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13052-017-0339-y
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
13052_2017_Article_339.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: articolo
Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 385.59 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
385.59 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/2896469
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 7
social impact