Value-based comparison of ambulatory children with respiratory diseases in an emergency department and a walk-in clinic: a retrospective cohort study in Québec, Canada

OBJECTIVE

To compare health outcomes and costs given in the emergency department (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory children presenting with acute respiratory diseases.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted from April 2016 to March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. The ED is a paediatric tertiary care centre, and the clinic has access to lab tests and X-rays.

PARTICIPANTS

Inclusion criteria were children: (1) aged from 2 to 17 years old and (2) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia or acute asthma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or clinic within 3 and 7 days of the index visit. The secondary outcome measures were the mean cost of care estimated using time-driven activity-based costing and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients.

RESULTS

We included 532 children seen in the ED and 201 seen in the walk-in clinic. The incidence of return visits at 3 and 7 days was 20.7% and 27.3% in the ED vs 6.5% and 11.4% in the clinic (adjusted relative risk at 3 days (aRR) (95% CI) 3.17 (1.77 to 5.66) and aRR at 7 days 2.24 (1.46 to 3.44)). The mean cost (95% CI) of care (CAD) at the index visit was $C96.68 (92.62 to 100.74) in the ED vs $C48.82 (45.47 to 52.16) in the clinic (mean difference (95% CI): 46.15 (41.29 to 51.02)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was less common in the ED than in the clinic (1.5% vs 16.4%; aRR 0.10 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.32)).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of return visits and cost of care were significantly higher in the ED, while antibiotic use for URTI was more frequent in the walk-in clinic. These data may help determine which setting offers the highest value to ambulatory children with acute respiratory conditions.

A value-based comparison of the management of respiratory diseases in walk-in clinics and emergency departments

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to compare some of the health outcomes and costs associated with value of care in emergency departments (ED) and walk-in clinics for ambulatory patients presenting with an acute respiratory disease.

METHODS

A health records review was conducted from April 2016 through March 2017 in one ED and one walk-in clinic. Inclusion criteria were: (i) ambulatory patients at least 18 years old, (ii) discharged home with a diagnosis of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients returning to any ED or walk-in clinic within three and seven days of the index visit. Secondary outcomes were the mean cost of care and the incidence of antibiotic prescription for URTI patients. The cost of care was estimated from the Ministry of Health's perspectives using time-driven activity-based costing.

RESULTS

The ED group included 170 patients and the walk-in clinic group 326 patients. The return visit incidences at three and seven days were, respectively, 25.9% and 38.2% in the ED vs. 4.9% and 14.7% in the walk-in clinic (adjusted relative risk (arr) of 4.7 (95% CI 2.6-8.6) and 2.7 (1.9-3.9)). The mean cost ($Cdn) of the index visit care was 116.0 (106.3-125.7) in the ED vs. 62.5 (57.7-67.3) in the walk-in clinic (mean difference of 56.4 (45.7-67.1)). Antibiotic prescription for URTI was 5.6% in the ED vs. 24.7% in the walk-in clinic (arr 0.2, 0.01-0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first in a larger research program to compare the value of care between walk-in clinics and the ED. The potential advantages of walk-in clinics over EDs (lower costs, lower incidence of return visits) for ambulatory patients with respiratory diseases should be considered in healthcare planning.

P–640 High physical activity and ovarian reserve: A prospective study of normo-ovulatory professional athletes

Study question

Is high physical activity (HPA) associated with low ovarian reserve in normo-ovulatory, reproductive-age women?

Summary answer

HPA does not affect ovarian reserve negatively.

What is known already

HPA is associated with menstrual irregularities and subsequent potential infertility, probably through hypothalamic neuroendocrine pathways. However, it is not yet known whether HPA influences the ovarian reserves of normo-ovulatory, reproductive-age women.

Study design, size, duration

This observational, cross-sectional study compared 30 professional female athletes who were engaged in HPA for at least 3 years prior to study recruitment, with high International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) scores and 30 women who did not engage in physical activity. The study was conducted at a tertiary medical center from 2017–2020.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

Physically active, normo-ovulatory women (n = 30), ages 20–35 years were recruited from The Wingate Institute, the Israeli National Institute for Sport Excellence. Non-physically active women (n = 30), matched by age and BMI to the HPA group, were recruited from the hospital staff. Both groups were evaluated for ovarian reserve markers on day 2–5 of the menstrual cycle, including follicular stimulating hormone (FSH), antral follicle count (AFC), anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and Inhibin B.

Main results and the role of chance

The average age of the athletes (HPA group) was 30.1±2.1 years and of the nonactive (control) group 31.6±3.8 years (p = 0.071). BMI of the 2 groups was similar (22.6±2.4 vs. 21.3±2.6; p = 0.075) for the HPA and control groups, respectively. Regarding ovarian reserve, no significant differences were observed between the HPA group and the control group with respect to FSH (p = 0.304), AFC (p = 0.27), AMH (0.507) or Inhibin B (p = 0.074). For the HPA group, older age at menarche was positively associated with AFC (p = 0.008) and AMH (p = 0.009) and not with FSH levels (p = 0.313). For the nonactive group, no significant association between age at menarche and FSH levels, AFC or AMH was found (p = 0.433, p = 0.274 and p = 0.163, respectively). Additionally, for the HPA group, duration of physical activity per week (hours) was not significantly associated with FSH levels, AFC or AMH (p = 0.619, p = 0.608 or p = 0.997, respectively).

Limitations, reasons for caution

Although we investigated the ovarian reserves of 30 women engaged in HPA, a larger cohort would provide more information. Information on diet and sleep habits was not evaluated and may result in some confounding. Moreover, it would be more informative if we also followed these women regarding fecundability and fertility.

Wider implications of the findings: This study demonstrated that HPA may not negatively affect ovarian reserve markers. These findings may provide reassurance for women who are engaged in HPA and attempting pregnancy. Further research needs s to be confuted.

Trial registration number

0247–16