Emergency department crowding and thrombolysis delays in acute myocardial infarction
- PMID: 15573032
- DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.05.004
Emergency department crowding and thrombolysis delays in acute myocardial infarction
Erratum in
- Ann Emerg Med. 2005 Jan;45(1):84
Abstract
Study objective: We estimate the effect of emergency department (ED) crowding on door-to-needle time for patients given intravenous thrombolysis for suspected acute myocardial infarction.
Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of patients thrombolyzed in the ED for suspected acute myocardial infarction in 1998 to 2000 in 25 community and teaching hospital EDs in Ontario. EDs located close together and sharing a common ambulance diversion system were grouped into networks consisting of 2 to 5 hospitals each. At patient registration in an ED, the ambulance diversion status of all EDs in the network was determined. Network crowding was calculated as the percentage of EDs that were diverting ambulances on patient registration, categorized as none (0%), moderate (<60%), and high (> or =60%). Door-to-needle time was defined as time from ED registration to drug administration. Multivariable quantile regression and logistic regression were carried out; covariates included age, sex, ECG characteristics, previous acute myocardial infarction, vital signs, time of presentation, and hospital type.
Results: A total of 3,452 thrombolysis patients were included: mean age was 62.9 years, and 73% were male patients. Overall median door-to-needle time was 43 minutes (interquartile ratio 27 to 80). Median door-to-needle time was 40, 45, and 47 minutes in conditions of none, moderate, and high network crowding, respectively ( P <.001). The adjusted odds ratios for door-to-needle time delay (>30 minutes) and major delay (>60 minutes) were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 1.79) and 1.40 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.75), respectively, for high network crowding compared with none, and 1.21 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.63) and 1.06 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.29), respectively, for moderate crowding compared with none. In multivariate analyses, moderate and high crowding conditions were associated with increased median door-to-needle time (3.0 minutes [95% CI 0.1 to 6.0] and 5.8 minutes [95% CI 2.7 to 9.0], respectively).
Conclusion: ED crowding is associated with increased door-to-needle times for patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction and may represent a barrier to improving cardiac care in EDs.
Comment in
-
The quality gap: searching for the consequences of emergency department crowding.Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Dec;44(6):586-8. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.07.449. Ann Emerg Med. 2004. PMID: 15573033 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Emergency department triage of acute myocardial infarction patients and the effect on outcomes.Ann Emerg Med. 2009 Jun;53(6):736-45. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.11.011. Epub 2009 Jan 21. Ann Emerg Med. 2009. PMID: 19157653
-
Changing the site of delivery of thrombolytic treatment for acute myocardial infarction from the coronary care unit to the emergency department greatly reduces door to needle time.Heart. 2000 Aug;84(2):157-63. doi: 10.1136/heart.84.2.157. Heart. 2000. PMID: 10908251 Free PMC article.
-
Factors influencing the time to thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Time to Thrombolysis Substudy of the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction-1.Arch Intern Med. 1997 Dec 8-22;157(22):2577-82. Arch Intern Med. 1997. PMID: 9531226
-
Door to needle times bulls' eye or just bull? The effect of reducing door to needle times on the appropriate administration of thrombolysis: implications and recommendations.Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2003 Apr;2(1):39-45. doi: 10.1016/S1474-5151(03)00005-7. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2003. PMID: 14622647 Review.
-
A review on ambulance offload delay literature.Health Care Manag Sci. 2019 Dec;22(4):658-675. doi: 10.1007/s10729-018-9450-x. Epub 2018 Jul 7. Health Care Manag Sci. 2019. PMID: 29982911 Review.
Cited by
-
Emergency Department Crowding and Outcomes After Emergency Department Discharge.Ann Emerg Med. 2015 Nov;66(5):483-492.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.04.009. Epub 2015 May 21. Ann Emerg Med. 2015. PMID: 26003004 Free PMC article.
-
Improving emergency department patient flow.Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2016 Jun 30;3(2):63-68. doi: 10.15441/ceem.16.127. eCollection 2016 Jun. Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2016. PMID: 27752619 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Factors associated with physician follow-up among patients with chest pain discharged from the emergency department.CMAJ. 2015 Mar 17;187(5):E160-8. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.141294. Epub 2015 Feb 23. CMAJ. 2015. PMID: 25712950 Free PMC article.
-
Early identification and delay to treatment in myocardial infarction and stroke: differences and similarities.Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010 Sep 6;18:48. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-18-48. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010. PMID: 20815939 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Direct admission to improve timely access to care for patients requiring transfer to a level 1 trauma center.Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2020 Dec 30;5(1):e000607. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000607. eCollection 2020. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2020. PMID: 33437873 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical