Qualitative Factors in Patients Who Die Shortly After Emergency Department Discharge

Department of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
Academic Emergency Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.2). 08/2013; 20(8):778-85. DOI: 10.1111/acem.12181
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Early death after emergency department (ED) discharge may signal opportunities to improve care. Prior studies are limited by incomplete mortality ascertainment and lack of clinically important information in administrative data. The goal in this hypothesis-generating study was to identify patient and process of care themes that may provide possible explanations for early postdischarge mortality.
This was a qualitative analysis of medical records of adult patients who visited the ED of any of six hospitals in an integrated health system (Kaiser Permanente Southern California [KPSC]) and died within 7 days of discharge in 2007 and 2008. Nonmembers, visits to non-health plan hospitals, patients receiving or referred to hospice care, and patients with do not attempt resuscitation or do not intubate orders (DNAR/DNI) were excluded. Under the guidance of two qualitative research scientists, a team of three emergency physicians used grounded theory techniques to identify patient clinical presentations and processes of care that serve as potential explanations for poor outcome after discharge.
The source population consisted of a total of 290,092 members with 446,120 discharges from six KPSC EDs in 2007 and 2008. A total of 203 deaths occurred within 7 days of ED discharge (0.05%). Sixty-one randomly chosen cases were reviewed. Patient-level themes that emerged included an unexplained persistent acute change in mental status, recent fall, abnormal vital signs, ill-appearing presentation, malfunctioning indwelling device, and presenting symptoms remaining at discharge. Process-of-care factors included a discrepancy in history of present illness, incomplete physical examination, and change of discharge plan by a third party, such as a consulting or admitting physician.
In this hypothesis-generating study, qualitative research techniques were used to identify clinical and process-of-care factors in patients who died within days after discharge from an ED. These potential predictors will be formally tested in a future quantitative study.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the extent of agreement on underlying cause of death between death certificates and autopsy reports, we analyzed 272 randomly selected autopsy reports and corresponding death certificates from among all such data on autopsies performed in Connecticut in 1980. In 29 per cent of the deaths, a major disagreement on the underlying cause of death led to reclassification of the death in a different International Classification of Diseases major disease category. In an additional 26 per cent, the death certificate and autopsy report agreed on the major disease category but attributed the death to a different specific disease. Deaths due to neoplasms were most accurately diagnosed, with a sensitivity of 87 per cent and a positive predictive value of 85 per cent. Deaths resulting from diseases of the respiratory or digestive system were associated with the highest rates of disagreement. Diseases most commonly overdiagnosed were circulatory disorders, ill-defined conditions, and respiratory diseases. Diseases most commonly underdiagnosed as the cause of death on the death certificate were specific traumatic conditions and gastrointestinal disorders. The autopsy remains an important method for ensuring the quality of mortality statistics.
    Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 01/1983; 58(9):778-94. DOI:10.1056/NEJM198511143132005
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 11/1995; 43(10):1146-54. · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Qualitative research methodologies, though often used in other fields and in medical educational investigations. have not been used to study problems in emergency medicine (EM). These methodologies address qualitative data and provide a process of describing, interpreting, and explaining the dynamics of a population or phenomenon. The stages of a qualitative investigation include initial narrative description, interpretation, theory development, assessment of generalization, and evaluation. Important differences between this framework and those of quantitative research methods are described. These methods may be applied to systematic investigation of virtually any observable phenomenon or process in EM in which a better understanding of process would be valuable, such as patient flow, patient satisfaction issues, patient turnover and sign-out processes, bedside teaching, EM teamwork dynamics, and development of the career interests of students and residents. As with quantitative research, EM academicians should seek collaboration and appropriate training with guidance by established qualitative investigators when applying these methods.
    Academic Emergency Medicine 01/1996; 2(12):1098-102. DOI:10.1111/j.1553-2712.1995.tb03156.x · 2.20 Impact Factor


Available from
May 17, 2014