Search

Introduction: In March 2020, shelter-in-place orders were enacted to attenuate the spread of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Emergency departments (EDs) experienced unexpected and dramatic decreases in patient volume, raising concerns about exacerbating health disparities.Methods: We queried our electronic health record to describe the overall change in visits to a two-ED healthcare system in Northern California from March–June 2020 compared to 2019. We compared weekly absolute numbers and proportional change in visits focusing on race/ethnicity, insurance, household income, and acuity. We calculated the z-score to identify whether there was a statistically significant difference in proportions between 2020 and 2019.Results: Overall ED volume declined 28% during the study period. The nadir of volume was 52% of 2019 levels and occurred five weeks after a shelter-in-place order was enacted. Patient demographics also shifted. By week 4 (April 5), the proportion of Hispanic patients decreased by 3.3 percentage points (pp) (P = 0.0053) compared to a 6.2 pp increase in White patients (P = 0.000005). The proportion of patients with commercial insurance increased by 11.6 pp, while Medicaid visits decreased by 9.5 pp (P < 0.00001) at the initiation of shelter-in-place orders. For patients from neighborhoods 400% FPL the week of the shelter-in-place order. Overall, 2020 evidenced a consistently elevated proportion of high-acuity Emergency Severity Index (ESI) level 1 patients compared to 2019. Increased acuity was also demonstrated by an increase in the admission rate, with a 10.8 pp increase from 2019. Although there was an increased proportion of high-acuity patients, the overall census was decreased.Conclusion: Our results demonstrate changing ED utilization patterns circa the shelter-in-place orders. Those from historically vulnerable populations such as Hispanics, those from lower socioeconomic areas, and Medicaid users presented at disproportionately lower rates and numbers than other groups. As the pandemic continues, hospitals should use operations data to monitor utilization patterns by demographic, in addition to clinical indicators. Messaging about availability of emergency care and other services should include vulnerable populations to avoid exacerbating healthcare disparities.

Introduction: Hallway beds in the emergency department (ED) produce lower patient satisfaction and inferior care. We sought to determine whether socioeconomic factors influence which visits are assigned to hallway beds, independent of clinical characteristics at triage.Methods: We studied 332,919 visits, across 189,326 patients, to two academic EDs from 2013-2016. We estimated a logistic model of hallway bed assignment, conditioning on payor, demographics, triage acuity, chief complaint, patient visit frequency, and ED volume. Because payor is not generally known at the time of triage, we interpreted it as a proxy for other observable characteristics that may influence bed assignment. We estimated a Cox proportional hazards model of hallway bed assignment on length of stay.Results: Median patient age was 53. 54.0% of visits were by women. 42.1% of visits were paid primarily by private payors, 37.1% by Medicare, and 20.7% by Medicaid. A total of 16.2% of visits were assigned to hallway beds. Hallway bed assignment was more likely for frequent ED visitors, for lower acuity presentations, and for psychiatric, substance use, and musculoskeletal chief complaints, which were more common among visits paid primarily by Medicaid. In a logistic model controlling for these factors, as well as for other patient demographics and for the volume of recent ED arrivals, Medicaid status was nevertheless associated with 22% greater odds of assignment to a hallway bed (odds ratio 1.22, [95% confidence interval, CI, 1.18-1.26]), compared to private insurance. Visits assigned to hallway beds had longer lengths of stay than roomed visits of comparable acuity (hazard ratio for departure 0.91 [95% CI, 0.90-0.92]).Conclusion: We find evidence of social determinants of hallway bed use, likely involving epidemiologic, clinical, and operational factors. Even after accounting for different distributions of chief complaints and for more frequent ED use by the Medicaid population, as well as for other visit characteristics known at the time of triage, visits paid primarily by Medicaid retain a disproportionate association with hallway bed assignment. Further research is needed to eliminate potential bias in the use of hallway beds.