Abstract
Background Pressures on hospital emergency care services have led to increasing interest in new models of acute care provision. One such model is a medical emergency department where medical patients are triaged directly to acute internal medicine, without assessment by emergency medicine. The evidence for this model of care is unclear.
Design Systematic review.
Methods Studies included direct referral pathways to acute internal medicine. The protocol was registered prospectively (Prospero: CRD42023495786). Databases searched included MEDLINE (Ovid), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE in process, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Embase. Studies had no time or language restrictions. Studies were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, assessed by at least two independent researchers. ROBINS I risk of bias assessment was applied to the selected studies and a narrative synthesis was performed.
Results From 4405 abstracts, 89 full text articles were screened and 4 were selected for data extraction. Two studies assessed tools to predict the need for a medical admission and two studies assessed the impact of direct referral pathways to medicine. Risk of bias was mixed, and studies were heterogeneous. However, the studies reported a good ability to appropriately select patients for direct referral to medicine and a reduced length of time to medical assessment. There were no differences in other outcomes such as mortality or overall length of stay.
Discussion The current evidence to support direct admission to medicine, effectively a medical ED, is limited with studies being heterogeneous and of varying quality. Models for patient selection varied, but there was evidence to support accurate, early identification of medical patients and of reduced delays in medical assessment and care.
Conclusion Given these positive early signs of benefit, more studies are needed to design and evaluate care models such as medical EDs.
Registration Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023495786.
What is already known on this topic Direct admission pathways to acute medicine services are used in some centres in the UK with significant variation in how this pathway is provided.
What this study adds This systematic review is the first comprehensive synthesis of published research on direct admission pathways to internal medicine services. The limited number of studies were heterogenous and of variable quality. Different models for patient selection were included but were assessed, studies demonstrated the ability to identify patients likely to require medical admission, and a reduction in the time to medical admission. More studies are needed to assess how to structure and operationalize a direct admission pathway in the United Kingdom and internationally.
How this study might affect research, practice or policy Our study highlights the need for further research to help develop optimal pathways to enable patients with acute medical conditions requiring treatment to be reviewed by acute medical teams as soon as possible after presentation, to improve patient care in the context of growing demand for these services.
Strengths and Limitations
- This is the first systematic review of direct admission pathways to medicine.
- The systematic review was conducted using standardised methodology with the protocol prospectively registered on an open access database. There were no date or language restrictions applied.
- The main limitation of the systematic review is the limited number and quality of studies available for inclusion.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by University Hospital Plymouth NHS Trust - Acute Medicine Department.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
