Emergency department waiting times: do the raw data tell the whole story?
Janette Green A B , James Dawber A , Malcolm Masso A and Kathy Eagar AA Australian Health Services Research Institute, Sydney Business School, iC Enterprise 1, Innovation Campus, University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia. Email: jdawber@uow.edu.au, mmasso@uow.edu.au, kathyeagar@optusnet.com.au
B Corresponding author. Email: janette@uow.edu.au
Australian Health Review 38(1) 65-69 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH13065
Submitted: 20 May 2013 Accepted: 15 November 2013 Published: 17 January 2014
Journal Compilation © AHHA 2014
Abstract
Objective To determine whether there are real differences in emergency department (ED) performance between Australian states and territories.
Methods Cross-sectional analysis of 2009−10 attendances at an ED contributing to the Australian non-admitted patient ED care database. The main outcome measure was difference in waiting time across triage categories.
Results There were more than 5.8 million ED attendances. Raw ED waiting times varied by a range of factors including jurisdiction, triage category, geographic location and hospital peer group. All variables were significant in a model designed to test the effect of jurisdiction on ED waiting times, including triage category, hospital peer group, patient socioeconomic status and patient remoteness. When the interaction between triage category and jurisdiction entered the model, it was found to have a significant effect on ED waiting times (P < 0.001) and triage was also significant (P < 0.001). Jurisdiction was no longer statistically significant (P = 0.248 using all triage categories and 0.063 using only Australian Triage Scale 2 and 3).
Conclusions Although the Council of Australian Governments has adopted raw measures for its key ED performance indicators, raw waiting time statistics are misleading. There are no consistent differences in ED waiting times between states and territories after other factors are accounted for.
What is known about the topic? The length of time patients wait to be treated after presenting at an ED is routinely used to measure ED performance. In national health agreements with the federal government, each state and territory in Australia is expected to meet waiting time performance targets for the five ED triage categories. The raw data indicate differences in performance between states and territories.
What does this paper add? Measuring ED performance using raw data gives misleading results. There are no consistent differences in ED waiting times between the states and territories after other factors are taken into account.
What are the implications for practitioners? Judgements regarding differences in performance across states and territories for triage waiting times need to take into account the mix of patients and the mix of hospitals.
References
[1] Australasian College for Emergency Medicine Australasian College for Emergency Medicine: national triage scale. Emerg Med 1994; 6 145–6.[2] Australasian College for Emergency Medicine. Policy on the Australasian Triage Scale. Melbourne: Australasian College for Emergency Medicine; 2006.
[3] Eagar K, Dawber J, Masso M, Bird S, Green J. Emergency department performance by states and territories. Wollongong : Centre for Health Service Development, University of Wollongong; 2011.
[4] Independent Hospital Pricing Authority. ABF price model reference classifications for 2012–13. Canberra: Independent Hospital Pricing Authority; 2012. Available at http://www.ihpa.gov.au/internet/ihpa/publishing.nsf/Content/ABF-Price-Model-Reference-Classifications-for-2012-13 [verified 8 February 2013].
[5] Greene J, Hall J. The comparability of emergency department waiting time performance data. Med J Aust 2012; 197 345–8.
| The comparability of emergency department waiting time performance data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22994833PubMed |
[6] Gerdtz MF, Collins M, Chu M, Grant A, Tchernomoroff R, Pollard C, et al Optimizing triage consistency in Australian emergency departments: The Emergency Triage Education Kit. Emerg Med Australas 2008; 20 250–9.
| Optimizing triage consistency in Australian emergency departments: The Emergency Triage Education Kit.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18462405PubMed |
[7] Forero R, Nugus P. Literature review on the Australasian Triage Scale (ATS). Sydney: Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Australasian College for Emergency Medicine; 2012. Available at http://www.acem.org.au/media/media_releases/2012_-_ACEM_Triage_Literature_Review.pdf [verified 8 February 2013].
[8] Creaton A, Liew D, Knott J, Wright M. Interrater reliability of the Australasian Triage Scale for mental health patients. Emerg Med Australas 2008; 20 468–74.
| Interrater reliability of the Australasian Triage Scale for mental health patients.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19125824PubMed |
[9] Considine J, Botti M, Thomas S. Do knowledge and experience have specific roles in triage decision-making? Acad Emerg Med 2007; 14 722–6.
| Do knowledge and experience have specific roles in triage decision-making?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17656608PubMed |
[10] Deloitte. NSW Department of Health triage benchmarking review. Sydney: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu; 2008.
[11] Higginson I, Whyatt J, Silvester K. Demand and capacity planning in the emergency department: how to do it. Emerg Med J 2011; 28 128–35.
| Demand and capacity planning in the emergency department: how to do it.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3M7hs1WqtA%3D%3D&md5=39e21fd4bdcbc955b8288e31ca7391baCAS | 21030542PubMed |
[12] Guo B, Harstall C. Health technology assessment report no. 38: strategies to reduce emergency department overcrowding. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research; 2006.
[13] Hoot NR, Aronsky D. Systematic review of emergency department crowding: causes, effects, and solutions. Ann Emerg Med 2008; 52 126–36.
| Systematic review of emergency department crowding: causes, effects, and solutions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18433933PubMed |
[14] Dwyer J, Jackson T. Literature review: integrated bed and patient management. Melbourne: School of Public Health, La Trobe University; 2001.
[15] Dunn R. Reduced access block causes shorter emergency department waiting times: an historical control observational study. Emerg Med 2003; 15 232–8.
| Reduced access block causes shorter emergency department waiting times: an historical control observational study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[16] Bevan G, Hood C. Have targets improved performance in the English NHS? BMJ 2006; 332 419–22.
| Have targets improved performance in the English NHS?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16484272PubMed |
[17] Yousif K, Bebbington J, Foley B. Impact on patients triage distribution utilizing the Australasian Triage Scale compared with its predecessor the National Triage Scale. Emerg Med Australas 2005; 17 429–33.
| Impact on patients triage distribution utilizing the Australasian Triage Scale compared with its predecessor the National Triage Scale.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16302934PubMed |
[18] FitzGerald G, Jelinek GA, Scott D, Gerdtz MF. Emergency department triage revisited. Emerg Med J 2010; 27 86–92.
| Emergency department triage revisited.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20156855PubMed |
