Beyond Urgency: Emergency Nurse and Physician Perspectives on Nonurgent Emergency Department Use and the Role of Underlying Conditions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Research on nonurgent emergency department use is predominately focused on patients' perceptions. There are few published qualitative analyses of health care providers' viewpoints on the subject. The aims of this study were to: (a) explore the perceptions of both nurses and physicians regarding the role that the emergency department plays within the larger health care system; (b) contextualize how nonurgent visits in the emergency department were described by nurse and physician participants; and finally, (c) describe perceived reasons for nonurgent use of the emergency department by patients. METHODS: Using a qualitative descriptive approach, 16 emergency nurses and 12 emergency department physicians employed at a single institution (2 emergency departments) in Ontario, Canada, engaged in semi-structured interviews. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze qualitative data. Data were coded, iteratively reviewed, compared, and then placed into categories based on phrases, patterns, themes, and notable features. RESULTS: The overall role of the emergency department was perceived to be multifaceted in that it provided a place for quality care and acted as a safety net. Patients attending the emergency department non-urgently were characterized and differentiated by staff according to their underlying medical versus psychosocial/mental health condition. Health care providers reported that they believed nonurgent patients were influenced to attend the emergency department because of personal health beliefs, stress, and coping ability, health literacy, and/or satisfaction with emergency department functionality. DISCUSSION: Nonurgent use of the emergency department for minor medical conditions was generally discouraged by nurses and physicians; however, patients with psychosocial crises or mental health conditions that were nonurgent in nature were deemed appropriate and justified due to perceived gaps in health and social care in the community.
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) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 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) | 0,000 | 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 ».