1,370
Views
57
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Factors Associated with Ambulance Use Among Patients with Low-Acuity Conditions

, MPH & , MD, MPH
Pages 329-337 | Received 04 Dec 2011, Accepted 04 Jan 2012, Published online: 11 Apr 2012
 

Abstract

Background. The use of ambulances for low-acuity medical complaints depletes emergency medical services (EMS) resources that could be used for higher-acuity conditions and contributes to emergency department (ED) overcrowding and ambulance diversion. Objective. We sought to understand the characteristics of patients who use ambulances for low-acuity conditions. We hypothesized that patients who arrive to the ED by ambulance for low-acuity conditions are more likely to be members of vulnerable populations. Methods. A secondary analysis was performed on the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS). We included only patients aged 18 years or older who were triaged to the “nonurgent” category upon presentation to the ED. To compare patients who arrived by ambulance with those who arrived by all other modes, multivariate logistic regression was performed using a generalized linear model, and adjusted relative risks (ARRs) were calculated. Results. A total of 16,109 records from 1997 to 2008 (excluding 2001–2002) were included in the analysis. Significantly higher rates of ambulance use for low-acuity conditions were associated with: 1) older age (ARR 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18–1.43; per 10 years); 2) Medicare or Medicaid insurance (ARR 1.81, 95% CI: 1.36–2.41, and ARR 1.46, 95% CI: 1.12–1.91, respectively); 3) homelessness (ARR 3.30, 95% CI: 1.61–6.78); 4) arrival between 11 pm and 6:59 am (ARR 1.80, 95% CI: 1.43–2.27); and 5) certain chief complaint categories: psychiatric (ARR 1.78, 95% CI: 1.03–3.07), toxicologic/poisoning (ARR 3.26, 95% CI: 1.85–5.76), and neurologic/psychological (ARR 1.71, 95% CI: 1.34–2.18). Patients who arrived by ambulance were more likely than nonambulance patients to receive laboratory diagnostic tests (ARR 3.50, 95% CI: 2.80–4.39), radiographic imaging (ARR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.91–2.68), and admission to the hospital (ARR 3.99, 95% CI: 3.03–5.27). Conclusion. Our study builds on a body of work highlighting the factors associated with ambulance transport to EDs, confirms that certain vulnerable populations disproportionately use ambulances, and may inform interventions aimed at increasing access to nonambulance transportation and urgent care for these patients.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 85.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.