Hide metadata

dc.contributor.authorRuud, Sven E
dc.contributor.authorHjortdahl, Per
dc.contributor.authorNatvig, Bård
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-05T03:26:44Z
dc.date.available2016-07-05T03:26:44Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationBMC Emergency Medicine. 2016 Jul 04;16(1):22
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/50565
dc.description.abstractBackground Emergency room (ER) use is increasing in several countries. Variability in the proportion of non-urgent ER visits was found to range from 5 to 90 % (median 32 %). Non-urgent emergency visits are considered an inappropriate and inefficient use of the health-care system because they may lead to higher expenses, crowding, treatment delays, and loss of continuity of health care provided by a general practitioner. Urgency levels of doctor–walk-in patient encounters were assessed based on their region of origin in a diverse Norwegian population. Methods An anonymous, multilingual questionnaire was distributed to all walk-in patients at a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo during two weeks in September 2009. We analysed demographic data, patient–doctor assessments of the level of urgency, and the results of the consultation. We used descriptive statistics to obtain frequencies with 95 % confidence interval (CI) for assessed levels of urgency and outcomes. Concordance between the patients’ and doctors’ assessments was analysed using a Kendall tau-b test. We used binary logistic regression modelling to quantify associations of explanatory variables and outcomes according to urgency level assessments. Results The analysis included 1821 walk-in patients. Twenty-four per cent of the patients considered their emergency consultation to be non-urgent, while the doctors considered 64 % of encounters to be non-urgent. The concordance between the assessments by the patient and by their doctor was positive but low, with a Kendall tau-b coefficient of 0.202 (p < 0.001). Adjusted logistic regression analysis showed that patients from Eastern Europe (odds ratio (OR) = 3.04; 95 % CI 1.60–5.78), Asia and Turkey (OR = 4.08; 95 % CI 2.43–6.84), and Africa (OR = 8.47; 95 % CI 3.87–18.5) reported significantly higher urgency levels compared with Norwegians. The doctors reported no significant difference in assessment of urgency based on the patient’s region of origin, except for Africans (OR = 0.64; 95 % CI 0.43–0.96). Conclusion This study reveals discrepancies between assessments by walk-in patients and doctors of the urgency level of their encounters at a general emergency clinic. The patients’ self-assessed perception of the urgency level was related to their region of origin.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofRuud, Sven Eirik (2018) Immigrants’ utilization of a public emergency primary health care clinic in Oslo. Doctoral thesis http://hdl.handle.net/10852/65149
dc.relation.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/65149
dc.rightsThe Author(s).
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleIs it a matter of urgency? A survey of assessments by walk-in patients and doctors of the urgency level of their encounters at a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo, Norway
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2016-07-05T03:26:45Z
dc.creator.authorRuud, Sven E
dc.creator.authorHjortdahl, Per
dc.creator.authorNatvig, Bård
dc.identifier.cristin1366870
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-016-0086-1
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-54114
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/50565/1/12873_2016_Article_86.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid22


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 4.0 International
This item's license is: Attribution 4.0 International