↓ Skip to main content

New Zealand’s emergency department target – did it reduce ED length of stay, and if so, how and when?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
New Zealand’s emergency department target – did it reduce ED length of stay, and if so, how and when?
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2617-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Tenbensel, Linda Chalmers, Peter Jones, Sarah Appleton-Dyer, Lisa Walton, Shanthi Ameratunga

Abstract

In 2009, the New Zealand government introduced a hospital emergency department (ED) target - 95% of patients seen, treated or discharged within 6 h - in order to alleviate crowding in public hospital EDs. While these targets were largely met by 2012, research suggests that such targets can be met without corresponding overall reductions in ED length-of-stay (LOS). Our research explores whether the NZ ED time target actually reduced ED LOS, and if so, how and when. We adopted a mixed-methods approach with integration of data sources. After selecting four hospitals as case study sites, we collected all ED utilisation data for the period 2006 to 2012. ED LOS data was derived in two forms-reported ED LOS, and total ED LOS - which included time spent in short-stay units. This data was used to identify changes in the length of ED stay, and describe the timing of these changes to these indicators. Sixty-eight semi-structured interviews and two surveys of hospital clinicians and managers were conducted between 2011 and 2013. This data was then explored to identify factors that could account for ED LOS changes and their timing. Reported ED LOS reduced in all sites after the introduction of the target, and continued to reduce in 2011 and 2012. However, total ED LOS only decreased from 2008 to 2010, and did not reduce further in any hospital. Increased use of short-stay units largely accounted for these differences. Interview and survey data showed changes to improve patient flow were introduced in the early implementation period, whereas increased ED resources, better information systems to monitor target performance, and leadership and social marketing strategies mainly took throughout 2011 and 2012 when total ED LOS was not reducing. While the ED target clearly stimulated improvements in patient flow, our analysis also questions the value of ED targets as a long term approach. Increased use of short-stay units suggests that the target became less effective in 'standing for' improved timeliness of hospital care in response to increasing acute demand. As such, the overall challenges in managing demand for acute and urgent care in New Zealand hospitals remain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 42 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Engineering 8 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 6%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 45 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,330,435
of 24,696,958 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#405
of 8,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,978
of 325,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#10
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,696,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.