Skip to main content

Characteristics of children who are frequent users of emergency departments in England

Increasing pressures on emergency departments present a considerable challenge worldwide, particularly during winter. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, serious infectious disease incidence had fallen with the success of vaccination programmes. However, amidst the ongoing global pandemic pressure on hospital EDs are stretched to their limit. This can strain health resources and budgets and can result in poor clinical outcomes. Increasing demand for EDs may be driven by rising morbidity in an ageing population, poor access to primary care and increase in patient expectations. In England, in 2017/2018, there were 23.8 million  emergency department attendances, an increase of 22% since 2008/2009; rises were higher in the under-5 (28%–30%), and one-third of all British children visit an  emergency department each year. Such increases pose immense challenges to the National Health Service (NHS) amidst significant cuts in funding, given that that nearly half of the health budget is spent on emergency and acute care.

We conducted an observational study using routine administrative data. Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data covering all attendances at NHS hospitals in England for the period April 2014–March 2017 were used. We published our study in the Emergency Medicine Journal We found that one in 11 children (9.1%) who attended an  emergency department attended four times or more in a year. Infants, boys and children living in more deprived areas had greater likelihood of being a frequent attender. We concluded that infants and children living in deprived areas have greater likelihood of being frequent attenders. Interventions that support parents and contribute to reducing avoidable emergency department attendance, particularly among infants, are crucial to provide appropriate support to users of emergency departments.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-209122


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Relevance Over Recall: Rethinking How AI Uses Clinical Data

Our article in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine argues that safe and effective AI in healthcare must incorporate mechanisms that emulate human judgement - down-weighting old, inaccurate or superseded information and prioritising what is recent, clinically relevant and reaffirmed - so that AI supports, rather than disrupts, high-quality patient care.  Clinicians constantly revise, reinterpret and filter past information so that only what is relevant, accurate and timely shapes present-day management decisions; medical records function as dynamic “working tools” rather than fixed archives. By contrast, many AI systems lack this capacity for selective forgetting and often treat all historical data as equally meaningful.  This can lead to outdated or low-confidence diagnoses being repeatedly resurfaced, persistent labels influencing clinical expectations, and irrelevant, long-resolved events cluttering summaries and decision-support outputs. Such indiscriminate recall...
Post a Comment
Read more