Alexander T. Janke

Incidence of Hypertension-Related Emergency Department Visits in the United States, 2006 to 2012

Hypertension is a common chronic condition, but the burden of emergency department (ED) visits due to hypertension and associated patient and hospital characteristics are not well described. The goals of this study were to (1) establish the burden of hypertension-related ED visits, estimated by the total number, proportion of adult visits, and population-based rate, (2) evaluate for change over time, and (3) identify associated patient and hospital characteristics. The Nationwide Emergency Department Sample from 2006 to 2012 was used to identify hypertension-related ED visits (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes 401 to 405, inclusive, and 437.2), and this was linked to US Census Bureau July population estimates to determine population-based rates for each study year. Negative binomial regression was performed to determine whether rates of hypertension-related ED visits changed over time. A total of 165,946,807 hypertension-related ED visits occurred during the 7-year study period (23.6% of all adult ED visits), and hypertension was the primary diagnosis for 6,399,088 (0.9% of all adult ED visits). The estimated yearly incidence rate increased 5.2% per year (incident rate ratio, 1.052; 95% confidence interval, 1.044 to 1.061; p <0.001) for hypertension-related visits and 4.4% per year (incidence rate ratio, 1.044; 95% confidence interval, 1.038 to 1.051; p <0.001) for ED visits with a primary diagnosis of hypertension. Over the same time, the proportion hospitalized decreased and the proportion of visits increased at safety net hospitals and among uninsured patients. In conclusion, these data indicate that hypertension-related ED visits are common and increasing.

Access to care issues and the role of EDs in the wake of the Affordable Care Act.

CONTEXT Americans who received public insurance under the Affordable Care Act use the emergency department (ED) more frequently than before they were insured. If newly enrolled patients cannot access primary care and instead rely on the ED, they may not enjoy the full benefits of health care services. OBJECTIVE The objective of the study is to characterize reasons for ED utilization among American adults by insurance status and usual source of care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cross-sectional analysis of adult sample respondents to the 2013 National Health Interview Survey reporting 1 or more ED visits in the preceding 12 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Among American ED users that reported no usual source of care and who reported relying on the ED, 27.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.6%-32.2%) and 35.1% (95% CI, 28.0%-43.0%) noted at least 1 issue of access and none of acuity as a reason for their last ED visit, as compared to 17.7% (95% CI, 16.3%-19.2%) among those with a stable usual source of care. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although past research has shown that those who lack a stable usual source of care use the ED more often, this is the first population-level study to demonstrate their propensity for lack of access-based utilization. In the wake of the Affordable Care Act, EDs will need to evolve into outlets that service a wider range of health care needs rather than function in their current capacity, which is largely to address acute issues in isolation.

Trends in the Incidence of Hypertensive Emergencies in US Emergency Departments From 2006 to 2013

Background The incidence of hypertensive emergency in US emergency departments (ED) is not well established. Methods and Results This study is a descriptive epidemiological analysis of nationally representative ED visit‐level data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample for 2006–2013. Nationwide Emergency Department Sample is a publicly available database maintained by the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. An ED visit was considered to be a hypertensive emergency if it met all the following criteria: diagnosis of acute hypertension, at least 1 diagnosis indicating acute target organ damage, and qualifying disposition (admission to the hospital, death, or transfer to another facility). The incidence of adult ED visits for acute hypertension increased monotonically in the period from 2006 through 2013, from 170 340 (1820 per million adult ED visits overall) to 496 894 (4610 per million). Hypertensive emergency was rare overall, accounting for 63 406 visits (677 per million adult ED visits overall) in 2006 to 176 769 visits (1670 per million) in 2013. Among adult ED visits that had any diagnosis of hypertension, hypertensive emergency accounted for 3309 per million in 2006 and 6178 per million in 2013. Conclusions The estimated number of visits for hypertensive emergency and the rate per million adult ED visits has more than doubled from 2006 to 2013. However, hypertensive emergencies are rare overall, occurring in about 2 in 1000 adult ED visits overall, and 6 in 1000 adult ED visits carrying any diagnosis of hypertension in 2013. This figure is far lower than what has been sometimes cited in previous literature.

Appropriateness of Bolus Antihypertensive Therapy for Elevated Blood Pressure in the Emergency Department

Introduction While moderate to severely elevated blood pressure (BP) is present in nearly half of all emergency department (ED) patients, the incidence of true hypertensive emergencies in ED patients is low. Administration of bolus intravenous (IV) antihypertensive treatment to lower BP in patients without a true hypertensive emergency is a wasteful practice that is discouraged by hypertension experts; however, anecdotal evidence suggests this occurs with relatively high frequency. Accordingly, we sought to assess the frequency of inappropriate IV antihypertensive treatment in ED patients with elevated BP absent a hypertensive emergency. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study from a single, urban, teaching hospital. Using pharmacy records, we identified patients age 18–89 who received IV antihypertensive treatment in the ED. We defined treatment as inappropriate if documented suspicion for an indicated cardiovascular condition or acute end-organ injury was lacking. Data abstraction included adverse events and 30-day readmission rates, and analysis was primarily descriptive. Results We included a total of 357 patients over an 18-month period. The mean age was 55; 51% were male and 93% black, and 127 (36.4%) were considered inappropriately treated. Overall, labetalol (61%) was the most commonly used medication, followed by enalaprilat (18%), hydralazine (18%), and metoprolol (3%). There were no significant differences between appropriate and inappropriate BP treatment groups in terms of clinical characteristics or adverse events. Hypotension or bradycardia occurred in three (2%) patients in the inappropriate treatment cohort and in two (1%) patients in the appropriately treated cohort. Survival to discharge and 30-day ED revisit rates were equivalent. Conclusion More than one in three patients who were given IV bolus antihypertensive treatment in the ED received such therapy inappropriately by our definition, suggesting that significant resources could perhaps be saved through education of providers and development of clearly defined BP treatment protocols.