Emergency department use and length of stay by younger and older adults: Nottingham cohort study in the emergency department (NOCED)

19Citations
Citations of this article
29Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Younger and older adults attending the Emergency Department (ED) are a heterogeneous population. Longer length of ED stay is associated with adverse outcomes and may vary by age. Aims: To evaluate the associations between age and (1) clinical characteristics and (2) length of ED stay among adults attending ED. Methods: The NOttingham Cohort study in the Emergency Department (NOCED)—a retrospective cohort study—comprises new consecutive ED attendances by adults ≥ 18 years, at a secondary/tertiary care hospital, in 2019. Length of ED stay was dichotomised as < 4 and ≥ 4 h. The associations between age and length of ED stay were analysed by binary logistic regression and adjusted for socio-demographic and clinical factors including triage acuity. Results: 146,636 attendances were analysed; 75,636 (51.6%) resulted in a length of ED stay ≥ 4 h. Attendances of adults aged 65 to 74 years, 75 to 84 years and ≥ 85 years, respectively, had an increased risk (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of length of ED stay ≥ 4 h of 1.52 (1.45–1.58), 1.65 (1.58–1.72), and 1.84 (1.75–1.93), compared to those of adults 18 to 64 years (all p < 0.001). These findings remained consistent in the subsets of attendances leading to hospital admission and those leading to discharge from ED. Discussion and conclusion: In this real-world cohort study, older adults were more likely to have a length of ED stay ≥ 4 h, with the oldest old having the highest risk. ED target times should take into account age of attendees.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ogliari, G., Coffey, F., Keillor, L., Aw, D., Azad, M. Y., Allaboudy, M., … Masud, T. (2022). Emergency department use and length of stay by younger and older adults: Nottingham cohort study in the emergency department (NOCED). Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 34(11), 2873–2885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02226-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free