Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Factors influencing the decision to convey or not to convey elderly people to the emergency department after emergency ambulance attendance: a systematic mixed studies review
  1. Johan Oosterwold1,2,
  2. Dennis Sagel3,
  3. Sivera Berben4,5,6,
  4. Petrie Roodbol1,
  5. Manda Broekhuis7
  1. 1 Department of Health Sciences – Nursing Research, UMC Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
  2. 2 NHL Stenden, University of Applied Sciences, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Ambulance Department, University Medical Center Groningen, Roden, The Netherlands
  4. 4 Research Department of Emergency and Critical Care, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Studies, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  5. 5 Eastern Regional Emergency Healthcare Network, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  6. 6 IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  7. 7 Operations Department, Faculty of Economics and Business, Groningen, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Mr. Johan Oosterwold; j.oosterwold{at}umcg.nl

Abstract

Background The decision over whether to convey after emergency ambulance attendance plays a vital role in preventing avoidable admissions to a hospital’s emergency department (ED). This is especially important with the elderly, for whom the likelihood and frequency of adverse events are greatest.

Objective To provide a structured overview of factors influencing the conveyance decision of elderly people to the ED after emergency ambulance attendance, and the outcomes of these decisions.

Data sources A mixed studies review of empirical studies was performed based on systematic searches, without date restrictions, in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase (April 2018). Twenty-nine studies were included.

Study eligibility criteria Only studies with evidence gathered after an emergency medical service (EMS) response in a prehospital setting that focused on factors that influence the decision whether to convey an elderly patient were included.

Setting Prehospital, EMS setting; participants to include EMS staff and/or elderly patients after emergency ambulance attendance.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used in appraising the included articles. Data were assessed using a ‘best fit’ framework synthesis approach.

Results ED referral by EMS staff is determined by many factors, and not only the acuteness of the medical emergency. Factors that increase the likelihood of non-conveyance are: non-conveyance guidelines, use of feedback loop, the experience, confidence, educational background and composition (male–female) of the EMS staff attending and consulting a physician, EMS colleague or other healthcare provider. Factors that boost the likelihood of conveyance are: being held liable, a lack of organisational support, of confidence and/or of baseline health information, and situational circumstances. Findings are presented in an overarching framework that includes the impact of these factors on the decision’s outcomes.

Conclusion Many non-medical factors influence the ED conveyance decision after emergency ambulance attendance, and this makes it a complex issue to manage.

  • decision making
  • emergency medical service
  • aged
  • mixed atudies review
  • conveyance/non-conveyance

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors All the authors contributed to the study design. Data were collected and selected by JO, DS and MB. Critical appraisal of all the selected articles was divided among PR, DS and MB. JO independently reviewed all the articles and results were compared. Agreement on a definitive appraisal was obtained by discussion. The manuscript was drafted by JO in close collaboration with MB and SB. All the authors approved the final manuscript before submitting.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement Additional documentation on the data-collection process and appraisal is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.