English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective  Frequent users of emergency departments (FUED) account for a disproportionate number of emergency department (ED) visits and contribute to a wide range of challenges for ED staff. While several research has documented that case management (CM) tailored to FUED leads to a reduction in ED visits and a better quality of life (QoL) among FUED, whether there is added value for ED staff remains to be explored. This study aimed to compare, among staff in two academic EDs in Switzerland (one with and one without CM), the FUED-related knowledge, perceptions of the extent of the FUED issue, FUED-related work challenges and FUEDs’ legitimacy to use ED.    Method  Mixed methods were employed. First, ED physicians and nurses ( N  = 253) of the two EDs completed an online survey assessing their knowledge and perceptions of FUEDs. Results between healthcare providers working in an ED with CM to those working in an ED without CM were compared using independent two-sided T-tests. Next, a sample of participants ( n  = 16) took part in a qualitative assessment via one-to-one interviews ( n  = 6) or focus groups ( n  = 10).    Results  Both quantitative and qualitative results documented that the FUED-related knowledge, the extent FUED were perceived as an issue and perceived FUEDs’ legitimacy to use ED were not different between groups. The level of perceived FUED-related challenges was also similar between groups. Quantitative results showed that nurses with CM experienced more challenges related to FUED. Qualitative exploration revealed that lack of psychiatric staff within the emergency team and lack of communication between ED staff and CM team were some of the explanations behind these counterintuitive findings.    Conclusion  Despite promising results on FUEDs’ QoL and frequency of ED visits, these preliminary findings suggest that CM may provide limited support to ED staff in its current form. Given the high burden of FUED-related challenges encountered by ED staff, improved communication and FUED-related knowledge transfer between ED staff and the CM team should be prioritized to increase the value of a FUED CM intervention for ED staff.    Supplementary Information  The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-021-00481-9.

bmc emergency medicine

Does Case Management Provide Support for Staff Facing Frequent Users of Emergency Departments? A Comparative Mixed-Method Evaluation of ED Staff Perception