Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 10, 2026

Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
Published on: January 15, 2017
Fast track and the pediatric emergency department: resource utilization and patients outcomes
L C Hampers1, S Cha, D J Gutglass
1Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Children's Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL, USA. hampers.lou@tchden.org
Insights
Pediatric patients in a fast track (FT) unit had fewer tests and shorter stays than those in the main emergency department (ED). Outcomes and satisfaction were similar, demonstrating FT efficiency for low-acuity cases.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Emergency Medicine
- Healthcare Management
- Clinical Operations
Background:
- Emergency departments (EDs) often face overcrowding due to high volumes of low-acuity patients.
- Fast track (FT) systems are designed to manage these patients more efficiently.
- Evaluating the comparative effectiveness of FT versus main ED care is crucial for optimizing resource allocation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare patient evaluation, management, and outcomes between an on-site fast track (FT) unit and the main emergency department (ED).
- To assess the impact of FT care on resource utilization, length of stay, and patient satisfaction for non-urgent pediatric cases.
Main Methods:
- Prospective assessment of pediatric patients (2 months to 10 years) triaged as non-urgent over a three-month period.
- Patients in FT received evening/weekend care; others seen in the main ED.
- Telephone interviews conducted seven days post-visit to assess outcomes.
Main Results:
- FT patients had significantly lower mean test charges ($27 vs $52) and fewer tests performed (24% vs 41%) compared to main ED patients.
- Average length of stay was 28 minutes shorter in the FT.
- No significant differences were observed in patient improvement (90% vs 88%), unscheduled follow-up care (18% vs 15%), or overall family satisfaction (94% vs 94%).
Conclusions:
- Fast track (FT) care for low-acuity pediatric patients resulted in reduced testing and shorter lengths of stay compared to the main emergency department (ED).
- These efficiencies were achieved without compromising patient outcomes or satisfaction.
- FT models offer a viable strategy for improving ED throughput and resource management for non-urgent pediatric conditions.
Objective:
To examine differences in the evaluation, management, and outcomes for patients seen in an on-site "fast track" (FT) vs the main ED.
Methods:
Over a three-month period, patients presenting to an urban pediatric ED were prospectively assessed. Patients included were: triaged as "nonurgent"; aged 2 months to 10 years; not chronically ill; and had fever, or complaint of vomiting, diarrhea, or decreased oral intake. Evening and weekend care was provided in the FT; at all other times these low-acuity patients were seen in the ED. Seven days after the visit, families were interviewed by telephone.
Results:
Four hundred seventy-nine and 557 patients were seen in the FT and ED, respectively. The patients in the two settings did not differ in age, clinical condition, race, or commercial insurance status. Patient mean test charges were $27 and $52 for the FT and ED, respectively (p < 0.01). Twenty-four percent of the FT patients vs 41% of the ED patients had tests performed (p < 0.01). Average length of stay was 28 minutes shorter in the FT (95% CI = 19 to 36, p < 0.01). Follow-up was completed for 480 of 755 families with telephones (64%). The FT and ED patients did not differ at follow-up: 90% vs 88% had improved conditions (p = 0.53), 18% vs 15% had received unscheduled follow-up care (p = 0.44), and 94% of the families in both groups were satisfied with the visit (p = 0.98).
Conclusions:
Compared with those in the main ED, the study patients seen in the FT had fewer tests ordered and had briefer lengths of stay. These findings were not explained by differences in patient ages, vital signs, or demographic characteristics. No difference in final outcomes or satisfaction was detected among the families contacted for follow-up.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Distribution
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Metabolism
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Excretion
Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Models: Regulatory Decisions

