MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080769329 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200098

Modelling resource requirements and physician staffing to provide virtual urgent medical care for residents of long-term care homes: a cross-sectional study

2020· article· en· W3080769329 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Fahad Razak, Saeha Shin, Frances Pogacar, Hae Young Jung, Laura Pus, Andrea Moser, Lauren Lapointe‐Shaw, Terence Tang, Janice L. Kwan, Adina Weinerman, Shail Rawal, Vladyslav Kushnir, Denise Mak, Danielle Martin, Kaveh G Shojania, R. Sacha Bhatia, Payal Agarwal, Geetha Mukerji, Michael Fralick, Moira K. Kapral, Matthew Morgan, Brian M. Wong, Timothy C. Y. Chan, Amol A. Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalHealth Sciences CentreWomen's College HospitalTrillium Health CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingMedicineLong-term careEmergency medicineMedical emergencyCross-sectional studyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak increases the importance of strategies to enhance urgent medical care delivery in long-term care (LTC) facilities that could potentially reduce transfers to emergency departments. The study objective was to model resource requirements to deliver virtual urgent medical care in LTC facilities. <h3>Methods:</h3> We used data from all general medicine inpatient admissions at 7 hospitals in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada, over a 7.5-year period (Apr. 1, 2010, to Oct. 31, 2017) to estimate historical patterns of hospital resource use by LTC residents. We estimated an upper bound of potentially avoidable transfers by combining data on short admissions (≤ 72 h) with historical data on the proportion of transfers from LTC facilities for which patients were discharged from the emergency department without admission. Regression models were used to extrapolate future resource requirements, and queuing models were used to estimate physician staffing requirements to perform virtual assessments. <h3>Results:</h3> There were 235 375 admissions to general medicine wards, and residents of LTC facilities (age 16 yr or older) accounted for 9.3% (<i>n</i> = 21 948) of these admissions. Among the admissions of residents of LTC facilities, short admissions constituted 24.1% (<i>n</i> = 5297), and for 99.8% (<i>n</i> = 5284) of these admissions, the patient received laboratory testing, for 86.9% (<i>n</i> = 4604) the patient received plain radiography, for 41.5% (<i>n</i> = 2197) the patient received computed tomography and for 81.2% (<i>n</i> = 4300) the patient received intravenous medications. If all patients who have short admissions and are transferred from the emergency department were diverted to outpatient care, the average weekly demand for outpatient imaging per hospital would be 2.6 ultrasounds, 11.9 computed tomographic scans and 23.9 radiographs per week. The average daily volume of urgent medical virtual assessments would range from 2.0 to 5.8 per hospital. A single centralized virtual assessment centre staffed by 2 or 3 physicians would provide services similar in efficiency (measured by waiting time for physician assessment) to 7 separate centres staffed by 1 physician each. <h3>Interpretation:</h3> The provision of acute medical care to LTC residents at their facility would probably require rapid access to outpatient diagnostic imaging, within-facility access to laboratory services and intravenous medication and virtual consultations with physicians. The results of this study can inform efforts to deliver urgent medical care in LTC facilities in light of a potential surge in COVID-19 cases.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207