Emergency Department Patient Preferences for Boarding Locations When Hospitals Are at Full Capacity
Study objective
Admitted patients are frequently boarded in emergency departments (EDs) when hospitals are at full capacity, which lessens the ED’s ability to treat new patients. One alternative is to board admitted patients in inpatient hallways. We assess ED patient preferences for boarding location.
Methods
We surveyed adult ED patients during a 4-week period on preferences for boarding location. Patients were eligible if they were currently being admitted through the ED and had experienced at least 1 previous hospital admission to ensure knowledge of both the ED and inpatient locations. Patients were asked to choose whether they would rather board in an ED hallway or an inpatient hallway or whether they had no preference. Survey responses were hypothetical and did not affect care or bed placement. We tested whether patient demographics, survey location (ED room or ED hallway), admission service, timing to room placement, time to admission request, and time to survey administration were associated with survey responses.
Results
A total of 565 patients were approached; 87% consented to be interviewed. Of those consented, 88% of patients had been previously admitted, leaving 431 patients in the study group. A total of 64% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59% to 69%) had a preference for boarding location: 59% (95% CI 52% to 65%) preferred inpatient hallways and 41% (95% CI 35% to 48%) preferred ED hallways. Survey location, admission service, time to room placement, admission request, and survey administration were not associated with survey responses.
Conclusion
When hospitals are at full capacity, patients would rather board in inpatient hallways than ED hallways.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supervising editor: Donald M. Yealy, MD
Author contributions: CD, JEH, KVR, FSS, and JMP were responsible for study design. CD and JMP conducted data collection and were involved in article preparation. FSS and JMP were responsible for data cleaning. CD conducted data entry. JEH, KVR, and WGB conducted data analysis. FSS conducted statistical review. JEH and WGB were responsible for study supervision. JEH, KVR, FSS, WGB, and JMP were responsible for final article preparation. JMP takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential confict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. Jesse M. Pines, MD, MBA, is supported by the Riggs Family Health Policy Grant from the American College of Emergency Physicians.
Publication dates: Available online May 9, 2007.
Reprints not available from the authors.
PII: S0196-0644(07)00377-0
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.03.016
© 2008 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
