Cargando…

Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?

BACKGROUND: The efficiency of the fast-track (FT) process in the management of patients in Emergency Departments is well demonstrated, but there is a lack of research focused on older adults. The aim of our study was to verify whether the FT process is efficient and safe for older adults admitted to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gasperini, B., Pierri, F., Espinosa, E., Fazi, A., Maracchini, G., Cherubini, A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7189513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32345234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01536-5
_version_ 1783527512280662016
author Gasperini, B.
Pierri, F.
Espinosa, E.
Fazi, A.
Maracchini, G.
Cherubini, A.
author_facet Gasperini, B.
Pierri, F.
Espinosa, E.
Fazi, A.
Maracchini, G.
Cherubini, A.
author_sort Gasperini, B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The efficiency of the fast-track (FT) process in the management of patients in Emergency Departments is well demonstrated, but there is a lack of research focused on older adults. The aim of our study was to verify whether the FT process is efficient and safe for older adults admitted to ED. METHODS: Observational case-control single-centre study. RESULTS: Five hundred four cases and 504 controls were analysed. The mean age was 75 years, and there was a predominance of women. In total 96% of subjects were classified with a “less-urgent” tag. The length of stay was significantly lower in the fast-track group than in the control group (median 178 min, interquartile range 184 min, and 115 min, interquartile range 69 min, respectively, p < 0.001), as well as the time spent between the ED physician’s visit and patient discharge (median 78 min, interquartile range 120 min, and median 3 min, interquartile range 6 min, respectively, p < 0.001). There weren’t any increases in the number of unplanned readmissions within 48 h, 7 days and 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The fast-track appears to be an efficient and safe strategy to improve the management of older adults admitted to the ED with minor complaints.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7189513
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71895132020-05-04 Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department? Gasperini, B. Pierri, F. Espinosa, E. Fazi, A. Maracchini, G. Cherubini, A. BMC Geriatr Research Article BACKGROUND: The efficiency of the fast-track (FT) process in the management of patients in Emergency Departments is well demonstrated, but there is a lack of research focused on older adults. The aim of our study was to verify whether the FT process is efficient and safe for older adults admitted to ED. METHODS: Observational case-control single-centre study. RESULTS: Five hundred four cases and 504 controls were analysed. The mean age was 75 years, and there was a predominance of women. In total 96% of subjects were classified with a “less-urgent” tag. The length of stay was significantly lower in the fast-track group than in the control group (median 178 min, interquartile range 184 min, and 115 min, interquartile range 69 min, respectively, p < 0.001), as well as the time spent between the ED physician’s visit and patient discharge (median 78 min, interquartile range 120 min, and median 3 min, interquartile range 6 min, respectively, p < 0.001). There weren’t any increases in the number of unplanned readmissions within 48 h, 7 days and 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The fast-track appears to be an efficient and safe strategy to improve the management of older adults admitted to the ED with minor complaints. BioMed Central 2020-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7189513/ /pubmed/32345234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01536-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gasperini, B.
Pierri, F.
Espinosa, E.
Fazi, A.
Maracchini, G.
Cherubini, A.
Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title_full Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title_fullStr Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title_full_unstemmed Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title_short Is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
title_sort is the fast-track process efficient and safe for older adults admitted to the emergency department?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7189513/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32345234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01536-5
work_keys_str_mv AT gasperinib isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment
AT pierrif isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment
AT espinosae isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment
AT fazia isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment
AT maracchinig isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment
AT cherubinia isthefasttrackprocessefficientandsafeforolderadultsadmittedtotheemergencydepartment