Premium
Crowding Measures Associated With the Quality of Emergency Department Care: A Systematic Review
Author(s) -
Stang Antonia S.,
Crotts Jennifer,
Johnson David W.,
Hartling Lisa,
Guttmann Astrid
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
academic emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.221
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1553-2712
pISSN - 1069-6563
DOI - 10.1111/acem.12682
Subject(s) - crowding , medicine , observational study , emergency department , quality (philosophy) , cross sectional study , medline , cohort study , family medicine , data extraction , clinical study design , randomized controlled trial , clinical trial , nursing , surgery , pathology , philosophy , epistemology , neuroscience , political science , law , biology
Objectives Despite the substantial body of literature on emergency department ( ED ) crowding, to the best of our knowledge, there is no agreement on the measure or measures that should be used to quantify crowding. The objective of this systematic review was to identify existing measures of ED crowding that have been linked to quality of care as defined by the Institute of Medicine ( IOM ) quality domains (safe, effective, patient‐centered, efficient, timely, and equitable). Methods Six major bibliographic databases were searched from January 1980 to January 2012, and hand searches were conducted of relevant journals and conference proceedings. Observational studies (cross‐sectional, cohort, and case‐control), quality improvement studies, quasi‐experimental (e.g., before/after) studies, and randomized controlled trials were considered for inclusion. Studies that did not provide measures of ED crowding were excluded. Studies that did not provide quantitative data on the link between crowding measures and quality of care were also excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility, completed data extraction, and assessed study quality using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale ( NOS ) for observational studies and a modified version of the NOS for cross‐sectional studies. Results The search identified 7,413 articles. Thirty‐two articles were included in the review: six cross‐sectional, one case‐control, 23 cohort, and two retrospective reviews of performance improvement data. Methodologic quality was moderate, with weaknesses in the reporting of study design and methodology. Overall, 15 of the crowding measures studied had quantifiable links to quality of care. The three measures most frequently linked to quality of care were the number of patients in the waiting room, ED occupancy (percentage of overall ED beds filled), and the number of admitted patients in the ED awaiting inpatient beds. None of the articles provided data on the link between crowding measures and the IOM domains reflecting equitable and efficient care. Conclusions The results of this review provide data on the association between ED crowding measures and quality of care. Three simple crowding measures have been linked to quality of care in multiple publications.