We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
Sex-related Differences in Emergency Department Renal Colic Management: Females Have Fewer Computed Tomography Scans but Similar Outcomes.
Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 October
BACKGROUND: Sex-related differences occur in many areas of medicine. Emergency department (ED) studies have suggested differences in access to care, diagnostic imaging use, pain management, and intervention. We investigated sex-based differences in the care and outcomes for ED patients with acute renal colic.
METHODS: This was a multicenter population-based retrospective observational cohort study using administrative data and supplemented by structured chart review. All patients seen in Calgary Health Region EDs between January 1 and December 31, 2014, with an ED diagnosis of renal colic based on the following ICD-10 codes were eligible for inclusion: calculus of kidney (N200), calculus of ureter (N201), calculus of kidney with calculus of ureter (N202), hydronephrosis with renal and ureteral calculous obstruction (N132), unspecified renal colic (N23), and unspecified urinary calculus (N209). ED visit data and test results were accessed in the regional ED clinical database. Stone characteristics were captured from diagnostic imaging reports. Regional hospital databases were used to identify subsequent ED encounters, hospital admissions, and surgical procedures within 60 days. Outcomes were stratified by sex. The primary outcome, intended as a marker of overall effectiveness of ED care, was the unscheduled 7-day ED revisit rate among patients who were discharged home after their index ED visit. Secondary outcomes included ED pain management as reflected by administration of narcotics or intravenous nonsteroidals, the performance of advanced imaging-either ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT), and the proportion of patients who required hospitalization or surgical intervention within 60 days.
RESULTS: From January 1 to December 31, 2014, a total of 3,104 eligible patients were studied: 1,111 women (35.8%) and 1,993 men (64.2%). Baseline characteristics, access times, analgesic use, and admission rates were similar in both groups. Men were more likely to have CT (68.9% vs. 58.5%, difference = 10.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.8 to 14.0) while women were more likely to have US (20.8% vs. 9.6%, difference = 11.2%, 95% CI = 8.4 to 13.9). At 7 days, 17.9% of women and 19.0% of men who were discharged after their index ED visit required an ED revisit (difference = 1.1%, 95% CI = -2.8 to 4.9). Men were more likely to be hospitalized at 7 days (9.8% vs. 6.5%, difference = 3.3%, 95% CI = 0.6 to 6.0).
CONCLUSION: This study shows greater reliance on US in females but no other sex-specific differences in the management of ED patients with acute renal colic. Higher CT use in men was not associated with improved outcomes, and we found no important differences in access to care, diagnostic or treatment intensity, or revisit rates as a marker of care effectiveness.
METHODS: This was a multicenter population-based retrospective observational cohort study using administrative data and supplemented by structured chart review. All patients seen in Calgary Health Region EDs between January 1 and December 31, 2014, with an ED diagnosis of renal colic based on the following ICD-10 codes were eligible for inclusion: calculus of kidney (N200), calculus of ureter (N201), calculus of kidney with calculus of ureter (N202), hydronephrosis with renal and ureteral calculous obstruction (N132), unspecified renal colic (N23), and unspecified urinary calculus (N209). ED visit data and test results were accessed in the regional ED clinical database. Stone characteristics were captured from diagnostic imaging reports. Regional hospital databases were used to identify subsequent ED encounters, hospital admissions, and surgical procedures within 60 days. Outcomes were stratified by sex. The primary outcome, intended as a marker of overall effectiveness of ED care, was the unscheduled 7-day ED revisit rate among patients who were discharged home after their index ED visit. Secondary outcomes included ED pain management as reflected by administration of narcotics or intravenous nonsteroidals, the performance of advanced imaging-either ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT), and the proportion of patients who required hospitalization or surgical intervention within 60 days.
RESULTS: From January 1 to December 31, 2014, a total of 3,104 eligible patients were studied: 1,111 women (35.8%) and 1,993 men (64.2%). Baseline characteristics, access times, analgesic use, and admission rates were similar in both groups. Men were more likely to have CT (68.9% vs. 58.5%, difference = 10.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.8 to 14.0) while women were more likely to have US (20.8% vs. 9.6%, difference = 11.2%, 95% CI = 8.4 to 13.9). At 7 days, 17.9% of women and 19.0% of men who were discharged after their index ED visit required an ED revisit (difference = 1.1%, 95% CI = -2.8 to 4.9). Men were more likely to be hospitalized at 7 days (9.8% vs. 6.5%, difference = 3.3%, 95% CI = 0.6 to 6.0).
CONCLUSION: This study shows greater reliance on US in females but no other sex-specific differences in the management of ED patients with acute renal colic. Higher CT use in men was not associated with improved outcomes, and we found no important differences in access to care, diagnostic or treatment intensity, or revisit rates as a marker of care effectiveness.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app