ObjectiveOlder adults are hospitalised from the emergency department (ED) without potentially needing hospital care. Knowledge about rates, associative factors and causes of these preventable emergency admissions (PEAs) is limited. This study aimed to determine the rates, associative factors and causes for PEAs of older adults.DesignA mixed-method observational study.SettingThe EDs of two Dutch hospitals.Participants492 patients aged >70 years and hospitalised from the ED.MeasurementsQuantitative data were retrospectively extracted from the electronical medical record over a 1-month period. Admissions were classified (non)preventable based on a standardised approach. Univariate and multivariate multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to identify possible associations between PEAs and demographic, clinical and care process factors. Qualitative data were prospectively collected by email and telephone interviews and analysed thematically to explore hospital physician’s perceived causes for the identified PEAs.ResultsOf the 492 included cases, 86 (17.5%) were classified as PEA. Patients with a higher age (adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08; p=0.04), a low urgency classification (adjusted OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.15; p=0.01), and attending the ED in the weekend (adjusted OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.37; p<0.01) were associated with an increased likelihood of a PEA. 49 physicians were interviewed by telephone and email. Perceived causes for PEAs were related to patient’s attitudes (eg, postponement of medical care at home), provider’s attitudes (eg, deciding for admission after family pressure), health system deficiencies (eg, limited access to community services during out-of-hours and delayed access to inpatient diagnostic resources) and poor communication between primary care and hospital professionals about patient treatment preferences.ConclusionsOur findings contribute to existing evidence that many emergency admissions of older adults are preventable, thereby indicating a possible source of unnecessary expensive, and potentially harmful, hospital care.

ObjectiveSuboptimal transitional care (ie, needs assessment and coordination of follow-up care) in the emergency department (ED) is an important cause of ED revisits and hospital admissions and may potentially harm patients, especially frail older adults. We aimed to systematically review the effect of ED-based interventions by health professionals who are dedicated to providing transitional care to older adults.DesignSystematic review.MeasurementsWe searched five biomedical databases for published (quasi)experimental studies evaluating the effects of health professionals in the ED dedicated to providing transitional care to older ED patients on clinical, process and/or service use outcomes. Reviewers screened studies for relevance and assessed methodological quality with published criteria (Robins-1 and the Cochrane risk of bias tool). Data were synthesised around study and intervention characteristics and outcomes of interest.ResultsFrom the 6561 references initially extracted from the databases, 12 studies were eligible for inclusion. Two types of interventions were identified, namely, individual needs assessment of ED patients (8 studies; 75%) and discharge planning and coordination of services (4 studies; 25%). Structured individual needs assessment was associated with a significant decrease in hospital admissions, hospital readmissions and ED revisits. Individualised discharge plans from the ED were associated with a significant decrease in ED revisits and hospital readmission. The overall methodological quality of the included studies was relatively low.ConclusionsComprehensive assessment of patient needs and ED discharge planning and coordination of services by health professionals interested in transitional care can help optimise the transition of care for older ED patients and reduce the risk of costly and potentially harmful (re)admissions for this population. However, more robust research is needed on the effectiveness of these interventions aiming to improve clinical, process and service use outcomes.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021237345.