Casemix and performance of Australian emergency departments: A comparison of major city, regional and remote locations

Abstract

ObjectiveEDs are an essential service, and higher rates of presentations per population are seen in regional and remote areas compared to major cities. Australia‐wide differences in utilisation and performance remain largely unknown.MethodsThis was a descriptive, retrospective epidemiological study analysing data collected via the National Non‐Admitted Patient Emergency Department Care Database managed by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Data from all reporting public hospitals in Australia for the period between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019 were analysed. Reporting EDs were geographically categorised using the 2016 Australian Statistical Geography Standard – Remoteness Area.ResultsED presentations for the 293 reporting EDs were 8 352 192 (median 17 904, range 8–113 929), one‐third (33.09%, 95% CI 33.06–33.12) were outside major cities. Remote ED presentations were less likely to arrive by ambulance (12.13% [12.01–12.26]; major cites 28.07% [28.03–28.10]; regional 22.55% [22.50–22.60]) but more likely by police/correctional services vehicle (major cities 0.59% [0.58–0.60]; regional 0.71% [0.70–0.72]; remote 1.71% [1.66–1.76]). Presentations to remote EDs were more likely to leave without being attended by a health professional (5.29% [5.21–5.38]; major cities 3.93% [3.92–3.95]; regional 3.53% [3.51–3.55]). A larger proportion of admitted patients stayed at least 8 h in remote (21.83% [21.46–22.20]) and regional (21.52% [21.41–21.62]) EDs compared to major cities (19.82% [19.76–19.88]).ConclusionsOur study highlights ED utilisation, casemix and performance by location. The differences observed, especially areas of inequity and need for interventions, reiterate that imperative regional and remote EDs are appropriately resourced to support the communities they serve.