Annals of emergency medicine
-
To determine the cost of an emergency medical services (EMS) system, researchers, policymakers, and EMS providers need a framework with which to identify the components of the system that must be included in any cost calculations. Such a framework will allow for cost comparisons across studies, communities, and interventions. The objective of this article is to present an EMS cost framework. ⋯ Within each component, there are subcomponents that must be considered. This framework can be used to standardize the calculation of EMS system costs to a community. Standardizing the calculation of EMS cost will allow for comparisons of costs between studies, communities, and interventions.
-
Multicenter Study
Evaluation of a modified prediction instrument to identify significant pediatric intracranial injury after blunt head trauma.
We evaluate the effect of a modification of the University of California-Davis Pediatric Head Injury Rule on the ability of the decision instrument for pediatric head injury to predict clinically important intracranial injury in an external cohort. ⋯ In the NEXUS II cohort, a modified version of the University of California-Davis Rule misclassified a substantial proportion of pediatric patients with clinically important blunt head injury. Although we cannot evaluate the exact University of California-Davis Rule, we demonstrate that using stricter definitions of "headache" and "vomiting" and different wording than in the original study may have unintended or negative consequences. We emphasize the importance of careful attention to precise definitions of clinical predictors when a decision instrument is used.
-
The extent to which patients presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with minor conditions contribute to delays and crowding is controversial. To test this question, we study the effect of low-complexity ED patients on the waiting times of other patients. ⋯ Low-complexity ED patients are associated with a negligible increase in ED length of stay and time to first physician contact for other ED patients. Reducing the number of low-complexity ED patients is unlikely to reduce waiting times for other patients or lessen crowding.