Search

Introduction: The Emergency Department Avoidability Classification (EDAC) retrospectively classifies emergency department (ED) visits that could have been safely managed in subacute primary care settings, but has not been validated against a criterion standard. A validated EDAC could enable accurate and reliable quantification of avoidable ED visits. We compared agreement between the EDAC and ED physician judgements to specify avoidable ED visits., Materials and Methods: We conducted a cluster randomized, single-blinded agreement study in an academic hospital in Hamilton, Canada. ED visits between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019 were clustered based on EDAC classes and randomly sampled evenly. A total of 160 ED visit charts were randomly assigned to ten participating ED physicians at the academic hospital for evaluation. Physicians judged if the ED visit could have been managed appropriately in subacute primary care (an avoidable visit); each ED visit was evaluated by two physicians independently. We measured interrater agreement between physicians with a Cohen's kappa and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated the correlation between the EDAC and physician judgements using a Spearman rank correlation and ordinal logistic regression with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. We examined the EDAC's precision to identify avoidable ED visits using accuracy, sensitivity and specificity., Results: ED physicians agreed on 139 visits (86.9%) with a kappa of 0.69 (95% CI 0.59-0.79), indicating substantial agreement. Physicians judged 96.2% of ED visits classified as avoidable by the EDAC as suitable for management in subacute primary care. We found a high correlation between the EDAC and physician judgements (0.64), as well as a very strong association to classify avoidable ED visits (OR 80.0, 95% CI 17.1-374.9). The EDACs avoidable and potentially avoidable classes demonstrated strong accuracy to identify ED visits suitable for management in subacute care (82.8%, 95% CI 78.2-86.8)., Discussion: The EDAC demonstrated strong evidence of criterion validity to classify avoidable ED visits. This classification has important potential for accurately monitoring trends in avoidable ED utilization, measuring proportions of ED volume attributed to avoidable visits and informing interventions intended at reducing ED use by patients who do not require emergency or life-saving healthcare., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Strum et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: Redirecting suitable patients from the emergency department (ED) to alternative subacute settings may assist in reducing ED overcrowding while delivering equivalent care. The Emergency Department Avoidance Classification (EDAC) was constructed to retrospectively classify ED visits that may have been suitable for safe management in a subacute or virtual clinical setting. The EDAC has established face and content validity but has not been tested against a reference standard as a criterion., Objectives: Our primary objective is to examine the agreement between the EDAC and ED physician judgements in retrospectively identifying ED visits suitable for subacute care management. Our secondary objective is to assess the validity of ED physicians' judgement as a criterion standard. Our tertiary objective is to examine how the ED physician's perception of a virtual ED care alternative correlates with the EDAC., Methods and Analysis: A randomised single-centre, single-blinded agreement study. We will randomly select ED charts between 1 January and 31 December 2019 from an academic hospital in Hamilton, Canada. ED charts will be randomly assigned to participating ED physicians who will evaluate if this ED visit could have been managed appropriately and safely in a subacute and/or virtual model of care. Each chart will be reviewed by two physicians independently. We compute our needed sample size to be 79 charts. We will use kappa statistics to measure inter-rater agreement. A repeated measures regression model of physician ratings will provide variance estimates that we will use to assess the intraclass correlation of ED physician ratings and the EDAC., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (2022-14625). If validated, the EDAC may provide an ED-based classification to identify potentially avoidable ED visits, monitor ED visit trends, and proactively delineate those best suited for subacute or virtual care models., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)