Comparison of Canadian versus United States Emergency Department Visits for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Despite the frequency of emergency department (ED) visits for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation, little is known about practice variation in EDs. OBJECTIVES: To examine the differences between Canadian and United States (US) COPD patients, and the ED management they receive. METHODS: A prospective multicentre cohort study was conducted involving 29 EDs in the US and Canada. Using a standard protocol, consecutive ED patients with COPD exacerbations were interviewed, their charts reviewed and a two-week telephone follow-up completed. Comparisons between Canadian and US patients, as well as their treatment and outcomes, were made. Predictors of antibiotic use were determined by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 584 patients who had physician-diagnosed COPD, 397 (68%) were enrolled. Of these, 63 patients (16%) were from Canada. Canadians were older (73 years versus 69 years; P=0.002), more often white (97% versus 65%; P<0.001), less educated (P=0.003) and more commonly insured (P<0.001) than the US patients. US patients more commonly used the ED for their usual COPD medications (17% versus 3%; P=0.005). Although Canadian patients had fewer pack-years of smoking (45 pack-years versus 53 pack-years; P=0.001), current COPD medications and comorbidities were similar. At ED presentation, Canadian patients were more often hypoxic and symptomatic. ED treatment with inhaled beta-agonists (approximately 90%) and systemic corticosteroids (approximately 65%) were similar; Canadians received more antibiotics (46% versus 25%; P<0.001) and other treatments (29% versus 11%; P=0.002). Admission rates were similar in both countries (approximately 65%), although Canadian patients remained in the ED longer than the US patients (10 h versus 5 h, respectively; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients with acute COPD in Canada and the US appear to have similar history, ED treatment and outcomes; however, Canadian patients are older and receive more aggressive treatment in the ED. In both countries, the prolonged length of stay and high admission rate contribute to the ED overcrowding crisis facing EDs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».