abstract
Background Time-based-targets for emergency department length-of-stay were introduced in England in 2000; followed by Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, and Australia after emergency department crowding was associated with poor quality of care and increased mortality.
Objectives The aim of the systematic review was to evaluate qualitative literature to investigate how implementing time-based-targets for emergency department length-of-stay has influenced the quality of care of patients.
Methods Systematic review of qualitative studies that described knowledge, attitudes to or experiences regarding a time-based-target for emergency department length-of-stay. Searches were conducted in Cochrane library, Medline, Embase, CInAHL, Emerald, ABI/Inform, and Informit. Individual studies were evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Individual study findings underwent thematic analysis. Confidence in findings was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.
Results The review included thirteen studies from four countries, incorporating 617 interviews. Themes identified were: quality of care, access block and overcrowding, patient experience, staff morale and workload, intrahospital and interdepartmental relationships, clinical education and training, gaming, and enablers and barriers to achieving targets. The confidence in findings is moderate or high for most themes. More patient and junior doctor perspectives are needed.
Conclusions Emergency time-based-targets have impacted on the quality of emergency patient care. The impact can be both positive and negative and successful implementation depends on whole hospital resourcing and engagement with targets.
Funding The Australasian College for Emergency Medicine provided administrative support for the study, no funding was received.
Registration PROSPERO CRD42019107755 (prospective)
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: organisational support for the review from the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine. No financial support was received for the submitted work. Many of the authors work in emergency departments in Australia and New Zealand, which have been subject to time-based-targets. Peter Jones, Roberto Forero and David Mountain published original research manuscripts on the topic, some of which have been included in the review. They have also received government and emergency college funding for time-based-target research.
Clinical Protocols
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=107755
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB approval not required, no patient information was required for this study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data is publicly available already.
