↓ Skip to main content

The ED‐inpatient dashboard: Uniting emergency and inpatient clinicians to improve the efficiency and quality of care for patients requiring emergency admission to hospital

Overview of attention for article published in Emergency Medicine Australasia, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The ED‐inpatient dashboard: Uniting emergency and inpatient clinicians to improve the efficiency and quality of care for patients requiring emergency admission to hospital
Published in
Emergency Medicine Australasia, September 2016
DOI 10.1111/1742-6723.12661
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Staib, Clair Sullivan, Matt Jones, Bronwyn Griffin, Anthony Bell, Ian Scott

Abstract

Patients who require emergency admission to hospital require complex care that can be fragmented, occurring in the ED, across the ED-inpatient interface (EDii) and subsequently, in their destination inpatient ward. Our hospital had poor process efficiency with slow transit times for patients requiring emergency care. ED clinicians alone were able to improve the processes and length of stay for the patients discharged directly from the ED. However, improving the efficiency of care for patients requiring emergency admission to true inpatient wards required collaboration with reluctant inpatient clinicians. The inpatient teams were uninterested in improving time-based measures of care in isolation, but they were motivated by improving patient outcomes. We developed a dashboard showing process measures such as 4 h rule compliance rate coupled with clinically important outcome measures such as inpatient mortality. The EDii dashboard helped unite both ED and inpatient teams in clinical redesign to improve both efficiencies of care and patient outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 61 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 20 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 24 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#16,091,394
of 24,484,013 outputs
Outputs from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#1,386
of 1,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,117
of 342,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emergency Medicine Australasia
#24
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,484,013 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 342,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.