Factors Associated with Emergency Department Utilization and Admission in Patients with Colorectal Cancer
We assessed emergency department (ED) utilization in patients with colorectal cancer to identify factors associated with ED visits and subsequent admission, as well as identify a high-risk subset of patients that could be targeted to reduce ED visits.
Data from Optum Labs Data Warehouse, a national administrative claims database, was retrospectively analyzed to identify patients with colorectal cancer from 2008 to 2014. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with ED visits and ED “super-users” (3+ visits). Repeated measures analysis was used to model ED visits resulting in hospitalization as a logistic regression based on treatments 30 days prior to ED visit.
Of 13,466 patients with colorectal cancer, 7440 (55.2%) had at least one ED visit within 12 months of diagnosis. Factors associated with having an ED visit included non-white race, advancing age, increased comorbidities, and receipt of chemotherapy or radiation. 69.2% of patients who visited the ED were admitted to the hospital. A group of 1834 “super-users” comprised 13.6% of our population yet accounted for 52.1% of the total number of ED visits and 32.3% of admissions.
Over half of privately insured patients undergoing treatment for colorectal cancer will visit the ED within 12 months of diagnosis. Within this group, we identify common factors for a high-risk subset of patients with three or more ED visits who account for over half of all ED visits and a third of all admissions. These patients could potentially be targeted with alternative management strategies in the outpatient setting.
KeywordsColorectal cancer Emergency department Emergency room Readmission
All authors meet all of the criteria for the definition of authorship: substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published; and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
This publication was made possible by funding from the Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery.
- 11.Costi, R., et al., Challenging a classic myth: pneumoperitoneum associated with acute diverticulitis is not an indication for open or laparoscopic emergency surgery in hemodynamically stable patients. A 10-year experience with a nonoperative treatment. Surg Endosc, 2012. 26(7): p. 2061–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Seow, H., et al., Does Increasing Home Care Nursing Reduce Emergency Department Visits at the End of Life? A Population-Based Cohort Study of Cancer Decedents. Journal of pain and symptom management, 2015. 51(2): p. 204–12.Google Scholar
- 19.Burke, T.A., T. Wisniewski, and F.R. Ernst, Resource utilization and costs associated with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy administered in the US outpatient hospital setting. Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2011. 19(1): p. 131–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Ma, B., et al., What has preoperative radio(chemo)therapy brought to localized rectal cancer patients in terms of perioperative and long-term outcomes over the past decades? A systematic review and meta-analysis based on 41,121 patients. Int J Cancer, 2017. 141(5): p. 1052–1065.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar