Voici les éléments 1 - 4 sur 4
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Screening of mental health and substance users in frequent users of a general Swiss emergency department
    (2015)
    Vu, Francis
    ;
    Daeppen, Jean-Bernard
    ;
    Hugli, Olivier
    ;
    ;
    Stucki, Stephanie
    ;
    Paroz, Sophie
    ;
    Canepa Allen, Marina
    ;
    Bodenmann, Patrick
    Background
    The objectives of this study were to determine the proportions of psychiatric and substance use disorders suffered by emergency departments’ (EDs’) frequent users compared to the mainstream ED population, to evaluate how effectively these disorders were diagnosed in both groups of patients by ED physicians, and to determine if these disorders were predictive of a frequent use of ED services.
    Methods This study is a cross-sectional study with concurrent and retrospective data collection. Between November 2009 and June 2010, patients’ mental health and substance use disorders were identified prospectively in face-to-face research interviews using a screening questionnaire (i.e. researcher screening). These data were compared to the data obtained from a retrospective medical chart review performed in August 2011, searching for mental health and substance use disorders diagnosed by ED physicians and recorded in the patients’ ED medical files (i.e. ED physician diagnosis). The sample consisted of 399 eligible adult patients (≥18 years old) admitted to the urban, general ED of a University Hospital. Among them, 389 patients completed the researcher screening. Two hundred and twenty frequent users defined by >4 ED visits in the previous twelve months were included and compared to 169 patients with ≤4 ED visits in the same period (control group).
    Results Researcher screening showed that ED frequent users were more likely than members of the control group to have an anxiety, depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or suffer from alcohol, illicit drug abuse/addiction. Reviewing the ED physician diagnosis, we found that the proportions of mental health and substance use disorders diagnosed by ED physicians were low both among ED frequent users and in the control group. Using multiple logistic regression analyses to predict frequent ED use, we found that ED patients who screened positive for psychiatric disorders only and those who screened positive for both psychiatric and substance use disorders were more likely to be ED frequent users compared to ED patients with no disorder.
    Conclusions This study found high proportions of screened mental health and/or substance use disorders in ED frequent users, but it showed low rates of detection of such disorders in day-to-day ED activities which can be a cause for concern. Active screening for these disorders in this population, followed by an intervention and/or a referral for treatment by a case-management team may constitute a relevant intervention for integration into a general ED setting.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Associations between perceived discrimination and health status among frequent Emergency Department users
    (2015)
    Baggio, Stéphanie
    ;
    ;
    Hugli, Olivier
    ;
    Burnand, Bernard, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
    ;
    Ruggeri, Ornella
    ;
    Wasserfallen, Jean-Blaise
    ;
    Moschetti, Karine
    ;
    Staeger, Philippe
    ;
    Alary, Séverine
    ;
    Canepa Allen, Marina
    ;
    Daeppen, Jean-Bernard
    ;
    Bodenmann, Patrick
    Objective : Frequent Emergency Department (ED) users are vulnerable individuals and discrimination is usually associated with increased vulnerability. The aim of this study was to investigate frequent ED users' perceptions of discrimination and to test whether they were associated with increased vulnerability.
    Methods : In total, 250 adult frequent ED users were interviewed in Lausanne University Hospital. From a previously published questionnaire, we assessed 15 dichotomous sources of perceived discrimination. Vulnerability was assessed using health status: objective health status (evaluation by a healthcare practitioner including somatic, mental health, behavioral, and social issues - dichotomous variables) and subjective health status [self-evaluation including health-related quality of life (WHOQOL) and quality of life (EUROQOL) - mean-scores]. We computed the prevalence rates of perceived discrimination and tested associations between perceived discrimination and health status (Fischer's exact tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests).
    Results : A total of 35.2% of the frequent ED users surveyed reported at least one source of perceived discrimination. Objective health status was not significantly related to perceived discrimination. In contrast, experiencing perceived discrimination was associated with worse subjective health status (P<0.001).
    Conclusion : Frequent ED users are highly likely to report perceived discrimination during ED use, and this was linked to a decrease in their own rating of their health. Hence, discrimination should be taken into account when providing care to such users as it may constitute an additional risk factor for this vulnerable population. Perceived discrimination may also be of concern to professionals seeking to improve practices and provide optimal care to frequent ED users.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Characterizing the vulnerability of frequent emergency department users by applying a conceptual framework: a controlled, cross-sectional study
    (2015)
    Bodenmann, Patrick
    ;
    Baggio, Stéphanie
    ;
    ;
    Althaus, Fabrice
    ;
    Velonaki, Venetia-Sofia
    ;
    Stucki, Stephanie
    ;
    Ansermet, Corine
    ;
    Paroz, Sophie
    ;
    Trueb, Lionel
    ;
    Hugli, Olivier
    ;
    Griffin, Judith L.
    Background
    Frequent emergency department (ED) users meet several of the criteria of vulnerability, but this needs to be further examined taking into consideration all vulnerability’s different dimensions. This study aimed to characterize frequent ED users and to define risk factors of frequent ED use within a universal health care coverage system, applying a conceptual framework of vulnerability.
    Methods A controlled, cross-sectional study comparing frequent ED users to a control group of non-frequent users was conducted at the Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Frequent users were defined as patients with five or more visits to the ED in the previous 12 months. The two groups were compared using validated scales for each one of the five dimensions of an innovative conceptual framework: socio-demographic characteristics; somatic, mental, and risk-behavior indicators; and use of health care services. Independent t-tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Pearson’s Chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test were used for the comparison. To examine the -related to vulnerability- risk factors for being a frequent ED user, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used.
    Results We compared 226 frequent users and 173 controls. Frequent users had more vulnerabilities in all five dimensions of the conceptual framework. They were younger, and more often immigrants from low/middle-income countries or unemployed, had more somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, were more often tobacco users, and had more primary care physician (PCP) visits. The most significant frequent ED use risk factors were a history of more than three hospital admissions in the previous 12 months (adj OR:23.2, 95%CI = 9.1-59.2), the absence of a PCP (adj OR:8.4, 95%CI = 2.1-32.7), living less than 5 km from an ED (adj OR:4.4, 95%CI = 2.1-9.0), and household income lower than USD 2,800/month (adj OR:4.3, 95%CI = 2.0-9.2).
    Conclusions Frequent ED users within a universal health coverage system form a highly vulnerable population, when taking into account all five dimensions of a conceptual framework of vulnerability. The predictive factors identified could be useful in the early detection of future frequent users, in order to address their specific needs and decrease vulnerability, a key priority for health care policy makers. Application of the conceptual framework in future research is warranted.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Case management for frequent users of the emergency department: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial
    (2014)
    Bodenmann, Patrick
    ;
    Velonaki, Venetia-Sofia
    ;
    Ruggeri, Ornella
    ;
    Hugli, Olivier
    ;
    Burnand, Bernard
    ;
    Wasserfallen, Jean-Blaise
    ;
    Moschetti, Karine
    ;
    ;
    Baggio, Stéphanie
    ;
    Daeppen, Jean-Bernard
    Background We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients’ emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers.
    Methods/Design We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient’s allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N = 125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N = 125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient’s satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later.
    Discussion Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care.