Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2026

A Novel Approach for the Administration of Medications and Fluids in Emergency Scenarios and Settings
Published on: November 9, 2016
[Appropriateness of emergency hospital admissions]
J Ochoa-Gómez1, A Villar Arias, E Ramalle-Gómara
1Servicio de Urgencias del Hospital San Millán de Logroño, C/Autonomía 3, 26004 Logroño, La Rioja. jochoa@nacom.es
Insights
A study found that only 4.5% of urgent hospital admissions were inappropriate. Medical specialists, unlike emergency physicians, had a higher risk of making inappropriate admissions.
Area of Science:
- Internal Medicine
- Hospital Administration
Context:
- Urgent hospital admissions require careful evaluation to ensure patient care efficiency.
- Assessing the appropriateness of admissions is crucial for resource management and quality of care.
Purpose:
- To determine the proportion of inappropriate urgent admissions in a general hospital setting.
- To identify factors associated with inappropriate urgent admissions.
Summary:
- A retrospective study analyzed 1,999 urgent admissions using the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP).
- Eighteen admissions (4.5%) were deemed inappropriate.
- Inappropriate admissions were significantly more likely when ordered by medical specialists (internal medicine, hematology, nephrology) compared to emergency physicians (OR 5.3, p < 0.03).
Impact:
- Highlights the need for improved admission protocols for medical specialists.
- Suggests potential areas for quality improvement initiatives in hospital admission processes.
- Provides data on the rate and predictors of inappropriate urgent admissions.
Introduction:
The aim of this work is to know the proportion of inadequate urgent admissions in a general hospital.
Material And Methods:
A retrospective and descriptive study of patients admitted during 1,999 was performed. The Appropriatness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) was used in order to evaluate the appropriatness of the admissions.
Results:
Eighteen admissions (4.5%) were inadecuated. There was a higher proportion of inappropriate admission (IA) when the physician responsible of the admission was a medical specialist (internal medicine, hematology or nephrology): odds ratio 5.3 in opposite to emergency physicians (p < 0.03).
Conclusions:
There was a low proportion of inadequate admissions (4.5%) and the risk of inappropriatness of the admission was major when it was ordered by a medical specialist.
More Related Videos
04:05Clinical Application of Phase Angle and BIVA Z-Score Analyses in Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 30, 2023
05:16Cutoff Value of Phase Angle by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis at Admission as a Prognostic Factor in Patients with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 10, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Hospitals-I
Hospitals-II
Nurses that work in hospitals have...
Planning Nursing Care I
Methods of Documentation VII: EMR
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
Introduction Cardiac Emergencies